Will the Humans of Bombay controversy impact its brand partnerships and user trust?

In the ever-evolving realm of social media, it's not uncommon for entities to elicit severe backlash from their audience, who admired them before. The popular Indian photoblog, Humans of Bombay (HOB), finds itself in such a situation.

Created by Karishma Mehta in 2014, HOB made headlines by filing a copyright infringement suit against People of India, a digital platform producing content similar to HOB. This legal action, as reported by Bar and Bench, prompted a noteworthy response from Brandon Stanton, the creator of Humans of New York (HONY). Stanton expressed discomfort with HOB's extensive monetization of his content and commented that suing for something he had forgiven them for seemed unreasonable.

HOB responded by expressing shock at what it perceived as a "cryptic assault" on their efforts to protect intellectual property rights. This opened up the floodgates for a barrage of trolling to follow for the brand.

The core ethos of HOB, centred around "cataloguing the beat of humanity, one story at a time," now faces scrutiny due to questions about the company's monetisation practices raised by Stanton. During a podcast with Raj Shamani in July 2023, Mehta disclosed that approximately 60% of the company's revenue comes from brand integrations. 

HOB tries to blend brand stories into their content to maintain authenticity. It has collaborated with companies like HUL, Amazon, Google, and Meta, resulting in a revenue of Rs 6.78 crore in FY 2021-22, with a profit of Rs 3.2 crore.

Social media users have taken issue with the fees charged for brand collaborations. Sources reveal to afaqs! that HOB billed brands over Rs 28.8 lakhs for integrations spanning 4 Instagram posts, 4 reels, and 8 stories. 

The backlash has led to a daily loss of approximately 2.5k HOB followers, while People of India gains 10-15k new followers daily, growing from 1.563 to 1.584 million between September 26-28. (Source: Comscore)

As the criticism mounts, questions arise: Will HOB lose brand interest, and can it regain the trust of its followers? Industry veterans weigh in with their perspectives for afaqs!.

Edited Excerpts

Naresh Gupta

CSO and managing partner, Bang in the Middle

HOB was right to file the case, given the blatant copying of their stories, images, and people. However, it's not just a legal issue; their monetisation model and over-commercialisation have caused concerns. Despite impressive financial success, the founder's claim of originality clashes with the widely known inspiration from HONY.

Over-monetisation has led to plagiarism issues. It reflects a corporate value of profit at any cost, even exploiting poverty. A tarnished reputation affects brand partnerships, crucial in the volatile world of social media. Thus, HOB is likely to face headwinds and scepticism from brands. Their response to Stanton was tone-deaf and arrogant, impacting their credibility.

Trolling is just one aspect; retaining trust and engagement is the challenge. Their damaged reputation may drive users away, seeking more authentic platforms. The danger lies in struggling to rebuild trust swiftly.

Sai Ganesh

Brand consultant and former brand lead, Dunzo

In the grand scheme of things, the current outrage and controversy surrounding Humans of Bombay and similar platforms may not have a substantial long-term impact on brand associations. Social media tends to follow these short-lived news cycles, and while emotions run high now, they tend to subside with time. Hence, I don't think business for Humans of Bombay will be impacted that significantly in the long run. Moreover, Humans of Bombay, along with other platforms, like People of India, might see a short-term benefit from this controversy. More eyes on their content, more engagement—it's a natural consequence of increased attention on social media.

The recent controversy may resemble a fleeting memory, with audiences continuing to engage as long as authentic and captivating stories are delivered. However, an issue about concerns about the transparency of paid posts will arise. Humans of Bombay (HOB) could improve this aspect by clearly indicating which content results from paid collaborations. Currently, there's ambiguity, and people are increasingly sensitive to such nuances. Going forward, HOB is likely to adopt a more cautious approach to paid partnerships, given the heightened awareness generated by the controversy.

There are two crucial aspects to consider in the case: the ethical and the legal. The situation escalated for HOB not when it filed for the copyright claim but when it responded to Brandon Stanton. Interestingly,  Stanton didn't take issue with the storytelling format of HOB. He was more concerned about their extensive monetisation practices. To this, HOB's initial response didn't sit well with the audience, and that had a significant impact on public perception.

Tarunjeet Rattan

Managing partner, Nucleus PR

This whole episode will definitely raise feelings of discomfort for brands who intend to associate with Humans of Bombay. HoB was supposed to hold the beacon high for authentic storytelling. The quality of content always suffers with excessive monetisation. Now that this is out in the open and openly criticised, brands are going to hesitate. 

It was not wrong to file for copyright infringement. As a media house/business, that is their right. However, when you take such action, it is always prudent to let major stakeholders know about the same, and get their input, get them aligned before going public with it. There is no point in slinging mud at each other in public and from two organisations who want to restore our faith in good humans and humanity, ironically. 

As storytellers, it has the best ammunition to deal with and come up with answers to trolls. But trolls by definition are unreasonable. I would suggest that it keeps doing good PR and raise the conversation to talk about the big picture on copyright laws and IP rights in India and herald the movement to protect small businesses. While continuing to bring out authentic stories, it need to make a change in their reporting structure to highlight and label paid/brand collaborations clearly as a lot of media houses do. Thus, it needs to draw a balance between paid and editorial stories. 

Lloyd Mathias

Business strategist and Angel Investor

Controversies often have a way of fading into the background with time, but here the underlying issues have left a bitter aftertaste. The recent revelation that Humans of Bombay (HOB) relies heavily on advertising for revenue has raised concerns. 

With its credibility now at stake, the impact can be substantial. It's hard to gauge the extent, as these incidents are often short-lived, overshadowed by the next big controversy. However, there might be some lasting consequences. HOB's decision to take legal action indicates the need to safeguard their identity, essentially 'buying peace' in a contentious situation.

Komal Lath

Founder, Tute Consult

HOB  needs to handle this situation with tact and lightness of touch. As a consumer, I’m of course in favour of transparency and understand the duopoly of the situation. As an entrepreneur, on the other hand, I can relate to HOB’s urge to protect its business turf.

That’s where the holy trinity of communication comes to the fore i.e., transparency, authenticity and sincerity. The fact that the Delhi High Court issued a notice to People of India, observed substantial imitations and found identical photos speaks volumes about the authenticity of the case from HOB’s point of view. It’s the transparency and sincerity from the founder’s table that’s questionable - especially after an old video of her’s surfaced wherein she mentions that the idea came to her “out of the blue”. 

From a communications standpoint, it’s important to choose your battles carefully. In the current business environment, one has to be mindful of the fine balance between business opacity and transparency.