top of page
Search

Influencers are Not Beauty Professionals

CONVICTED GURU

Let me tell you about this guy Christopher Lowe. 1985. This man gets convicted of taking client money, bouncing checks, and tampering with evidence. A hat trick. The SEC pulls his registration, bars him from going near another investment adviser, and figures that's that. So what does Chris do? He starts a newsletter. Paid subscribers. And when the SEC drags him into federal court to shut it down, he goes all the way to the Supreme Court and he wins. The Court says look, the law covers personalized advice, this is just a guy publishing opinions, and publishing opinions is protected. So a convicted thief walked out with the constitutional right to keep telling the public where to put their money. That's not some loophole somebody found last Tuesday. That's forty years old and it's the floor the entire finance internet is standing on right now.


LEGAL INFLUENCE

Meanwhile, over in China, you can't even post about money without showing the government your paperwork. Since the end of 2025, if you're talking finance, medicine, law, or education, you submit your credentials and the platform verifies them before you're allowed to open your mouth. Cite your sources. Label your AI. You get caught, that's about fourteen thousand dollars and your account is gone, not suspended, gone.


FRENCH AUTHORITY

France passed a law in 2023 that says influencers can't push financial products without clearance from the AMF, and the AMF was already dragging people in before the law even landed.


I want to be fair, because being fair is the whole point of this. There's no single European rule yet, France is just out in front. But out in front of Europe is still a country mile ahead of us, and I'm not about to give American finance the benefit of the doubt. America is the same country that let banks hand out mortgages on income nobody bothered to check. People who couldn't get approved for a studio apartment in the worst part of the city walking out with half a million dollar houses. And when the whole thing folded, who got the check? Not them.


AMERICAN BEAUTY INDUSTRY

So if that's the standard in finance, where there's federal law and actual regulators and a real chance somebody goes to prison, what do you think is going on in an industry everybody already treats like the thing you do when nothing else worked out?


Now here's where I have to check myself, because I'm not going to hold you to a standard I won't take a hit on. I used to say beauty has a low barrier to entry. That's wrong. Cosmetology is a thousand hours in New York and twenty one hundred in Oregon, which is more schooling than most states want out of an EMT, and that's the person keeping you alive in the back of an ambulance. So it's not a low bar.


Somebody actually went and counted, across eleven states, and out of an average sixteen hundred hours, about a hundred and sixty seven of them covered safety and sanitation. Ten percent. TEN. So we're not undertrained, we're trained sideways. A year of your life and a tenth of it goes to the part that can actually put somebody in the hospital. And that license? It only says who's allowed to touch a client. It has never once said who's allowed to talk.


The state can walk into my salon and check my station. Nobody has ever walked into a comment section.


RESEARCH IS ANTIQUATED?

Which brings me to the part that actually gets me, and it's not even the bad information. It's what happens when somebody does the work. You go find the actual study instead of the caption about the study. You check the ingredient, the mechanism, the percentage, the source. You show your math so anybody can come check you. And then here comes somebody with six months in a chair, no source, no mechanism, no data, nothing but a keyboard, a bonnet and a feeling, and they type "I disagree" like the two of you just did the same amount of work. And it survives, because people aren't out here scrolling for the truth. They're scrolling for permission to keep doing whatever they told a client last Tuesday. "That's just my opinion" is not a rebuttal. It's how you leave a conversation while pretending you're still in it.


OPINIONS ARE DANGEROUS

Your opinion is supposed to be built on something. Evidence, education, logic, and it should move when those move. If it can't survive somebody asking "how do you know that," it was never an opinion, it was a preference in a costume. And being contrarian is not the same as thinking. Thinking has a method. Contrarians just need somebody to argue with. Telling the truth online makes you the odd one out, and not because the truth is rare, but because it doesn't perform. A clean wrong answer beats a correct answer with conditions on it every single time. Fine. I'll be the odd man out. Being by myself doesn't make me wrong. Usually it just means I'm the only one who went and looked it up.


Forgive me if this sounds like a rant, it’s ( VIRGO ) season and I’m in my element.


Sources :

Lowe v. SEC (paragraph 1)

China’s credential rule (paragraph 2)


France, Act no. 2023-451 (paragraph 2)


The AMF authorization requirement:


2008 and unverified-income lending (paragraph 2)


Cosmetology hours and the 10% figure




BLOG | AUGUST 2026



 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page