e.l.f: w.t.f?

Eye, Lips, Face and...Hair?

Hi Afro-Nerds,

e.l.f has recently launched their Power Grip Stick and Slick hair gel, which is positioned alongside their infamous power grip line, to emphasise the potential ability for this new product to slick the hair back. It’s genius marketing, in my opinion; but this is where my praise ends, and my critique begins.

In their marketing promo and influencer packages, there was an uneven representation of content creators using the product, with a bias towards non-Black creators. The main issue is that by narrowly excluding Black content creators and models, they position their hair products as something new and not a competitive edge control, erasing the cultural significance of hair gel in the Black community. As a community, we have a pretty good grasp of the different gels on the market and how and when to use them. Many expressed on social media their displeasure with the ignorance shown by non-Black creators who narrate in their videos as though e.l.f. ’s products are new to the haircare industry.

“e.l.f out here making stronger hair gel [than] other haircare brands”

-content creator, TikTok

Some even went on to gaslight in the comment section, claiming that the product is not edge control. This is because the term “edge control” is closely associated with Black hair-texture products and sends a clearer message about who the potential target consumer is. This could explain why e.l.f. did not label its product as such, in an attempt to diversify its consumer base. However, as a brand with an already multicultural consumer base, the priority should not have been to re-market a culturally significant product, but to invest in stronger R&D that safeguards cultural heritage, by boosting the visibility of Black content creators. This ensures that our contribution to the beauty aesthetic cultivates cultural memory, resistance, and celebration, rather than promoting ignorant content that does the opposite.

Tik-Tok creator- “ it’s inspired by the power grip primer”

No- it’s inspired by edge control

Not long after, more videos circulated of Black content creators using the grip and slick hair products. So e.l.f. was sending out its appropriated products to non-Black content creators for free, while some Black creators purchased the hair products to review, which further circulated and promoted the product line. What message does this send to brands like e.l.f? More importantly, what should brands take away from this? The lesson here is that representation and recognition of cultural origins are essential. By fostering meaningful collaborations and visibility for all relevant content creators, brands can avoid accusations of cultural erasure and build genuine trust and loyalty across diverse consumer bases.

e.l.f should also have done its due diligence to preserve hair integrity for its consumer base, as a brand that doesn’t work in haircare. Edge control gel and the bristle brush are generally made for curly/coily hair types, and those with fine-straight hair types are at risk of compromising their hair integrity with continued use. However, as a limited-edition product, they divert away from long-term risks to avoid being sued or held liable for damage, so it really just feels like a money-grab rather than a meaningful contribution to the haircare industry. This shows how elements of Black culture are used for commercial exploitation while erasing and avoiding the political, cultural and historical significance. In an industry where Black consumers spend about 9x more than their white counterparts, e.l.f. was working largely against itself here. Black consumers have the education, knowledge and purchasing power to influence the trajectory of brands in haircare. Am I suggesting we boycott e.l.f? Not really. But when brands have the opportunity to uplift a community, and they refuse to do this, it perpetuates racial hierarchies that says Black culture has little worth unless it centres whiteness.

What are your thoughts on this?