The general public has become more aware that celebrities are paid to wear certain dresses, show up at certain clubs and promote certain items, and none of this seems to affect the celebrities’ status or take away from the brand. For the most part I don’t think the public loses faith in a brand or a celebrity if money’s exchanged - I think we’ve just come to expect it: it’s how things are.
This is a not a public that needs the authentic. Me, I’m one of those people who’d rather wear an old pair of jeans and the holes & faded denim are like a badge of honour. To buy new jeans that are faded with holes in them just seems easy - and fake - but I don’t think this matters to most people but I think there are signs that this is slowly changing - and the superbrands are aware of it.
The big labels are always on the lookout for the next best thing, and the need for a more authentic celebrity is driving their search further towards locally-famous celebrities with street cred that will keep the superbrand cool and hip and more than just “in style” - they need to be what makes something or someone hip & cool. It’s a sign of the times that superbrands are now going after underground dj’s and unsigned bands.
I actually think that this is quite interesting: a great DJ might need a makeup artist so if a superbrand is willing to provide one at no charge why not? They both get something out it - right? It’s hard to criticise someone as a sellout when they’re working so incredibly hard doing what they love and afterwards they’re on the bus back to their flat-share in Hackney - they deserve any perks they can get!