Latest / The Interline Podcast / Social Bans, Smart Glasses, Programmatic AI, And Heat-Tech

Transcript

Social Bans, Smart Glasses, Programmatic AI, And Heat-Tech · The Interline Podcast

• speaker-0: Welcome to the edit from The Interline, the show where we run quickfire analysis on our pick of the most important fashion and beauty technology stories from the last seven days. I'm Grace, the social editor, and I'm joined by Ben, the editor-in-chief, and together we have less than twenty-five minutes to give you our analysis on the stories that we think matter the most. Amazing. So should I already get into the questions? speaker-1: Morning, Grace. Great to see ya. Let's go for it. The one thing I can flag up is we ⁓ I said we'd have theme music this week. We don't have theme music this week. We're still ⁓ we're still working on the selection. Much, much harder than you think. speaker-0: Modeling Australia, the UK government has just issued a ban on social media for under 16s and it's going to be enforced next year. Obviously, it is still really early to know like the true impact of how this will look in reality, but I do think that it already raises some really interesting questions, specifically how fashion brands are going to market to younger consumers like Gen Alpha, for instance, now that they're not going to be on social media as much. I saw a really interesting piece from Vogue that was talking about perhaps fashion brands will have to market via games, since younger people will be spending more time in gaming environments. I also saw a really interesting story from WWD, and they were talking about a partnership between Samsung and Glance. Specifically, they're gonna be doing AI-driven interactive shopping, and they're gonna be incorporating that into all of their TVs that they've made in the last six years. To me, this feels like It could also be linked to this change and what's gonna happen, but I wanted to get your take on this. speaker-1: Yeah. So as a bit of background prep for this, I had to brush up on my definition of what constitutes Gen Alpha. ⁓ in my case, it's my kids, essentially. So ⁓ so all of my kids were born in the the 2010s and and onwards. So that puts them in this this prime sort of like teenagery, subteenagery sort of category. And that is a it's a pretty big category for fashion brands. It is a demographic that ⁓ the companies want to want to market to. Now, a lot of Attention-based marketing is very focused on social media because social media is the channel that's done the most effective job of capitalizing on the attention economy. If you listen to any of the executives from Instagram and TikTok and to a lesser extent YouTube, Netflix, those kinds of things, they will tell you that their biggest competition is sleep. Not just for this gen alpha demographic, but for everybody, because there is only so much attention to go round. Now I am a little bit conflicted on the social media brand in general, but what it does is it effectively removes a share of that attention market and that attention economy from fashion brands to market too. So if you are targeting those kinds of folks, you all of a sudden are competing for a slice of a smaller pie. Now, people who are not watching TikTok and who are not scrolling Instagram and who are not scrolling through YouTube and so on, where are they gonna go? Now, the parent in me would love to say. They're gonna read more. They're gonna go outside and ride BMX bikes or whatever I did when I was younger. The reality is that that attention is gonna move to whatever other screens and surfaces are available to them. Now, those screens and surfaces are gonna constitute gaming to to some extent. Now I know fashion brands have done marketing activations and other opportunities through Roblox and ⁓ and Fortnite and things in the past. Those have always been second fiddle. To what they do through TikTok and Instagram and so on because the share of the attention was was slightly lower. I think we'll start to see that rebalance. I think that Bogue article is correct in that. The other big thing though is people are not going to go, young people are not going to go from doom scrolling instantly to reading books and going outside. It's a very naive, idealistic way of looking at it. They're going to watch more TV. And if you look elsewhere in the news this week, Instagram in particular are making a bigger play for the television. ⁓ so they they're starting to introduce more in the way of like their own scripted shows. They're starting to put more tools in the hands of creators to create content that is not bound to a square or a vertical rectangle, but is more designed to be formatted for 169 or 1610 ⁓ displays. So this is absolutely the way that things are going, I think. And there is only so much attention to go round when that attention moves away from the surfaces that it's currently on. It's gonna go to more screens, unfortunately, and that does create an opportunity for brands. speaker-0: The next story caused a lot of online discourse this week. Meta has just released three new styles of their smart glasses across seven different colorways, but this time Rayban was nowhere to be seen within this release. Probably the most standout of the new styles was a collaboration with Kylie Jenner, and her style specifically has a very Gen Z Y2K aesthetic, which makes you think that they're probably trying to target younger consumers with this release. Overall, Meta has reduced the Price of their smart glasses by $80, but I believe Kylie Jenner's comes in at around $500. Interestingly, there was also news this week that Snap Inc. has also released these kind of augmented reality fashion smart glasses, but theirs come in at over $2,000. These are obviously two different approaches to wearables. So I wanted to get your take on all of this news and what you think is going on with wearables generally. speaker-1: Yeah, it's it is very interesting. So I I would argue that the partnership between Meta and SLOR Luxotica, the company behind Rayban and a lot of the other ⁓ eyewear brands that you know and recognize, was as much about manufacturing expertise as it was about and and manufacturing kind of clout as it was about branding. So SLO looks like they sure know how to make a pair of glasses. ⁓ and they sure know how to do it at a price point, ⁓ and they sure have ⁓ an effective monopoly on acetate supply and and and other things. So I think it's a fair, it's that was as much of a pragmatic sort of production-driven relationship as it was a branding one. Now, I don't necessarily think that the people who are buying the meta glasses particularly care about brand. The reason I'm saying that is most people seem to buy those. Metabray bands because they are the simplest way to get a camera on your face and to get a decent pair of not earbuds, but listening experiences. That seemed to be what people buy those things for. I suspect that the AI interactivity portion of it is a distant second for what most people want from it. And I suspect that most people they liked to some extent that it looked like a pair of wayfarers. But I don't think that was the major buying criterion. ⁓ so I don't expect them to see a big fall off by dropping the branding side of things here. And I suspect that they will continue to benefit from the manufacturing now that they've that they've built up. Meta are also mutual investors in SLO Exotica. So ⁓ it's not as though it's like a complete severing of ways, but it is a bit of a testament to what do people actually want from glasses? What do people actually want from intelligent glasses? And I would argue that it's functionality more than anything else. It's the camera and it's the the earphones. And if you can get those for a compelling price point, wonderful. I don't see anybody particularly caring about the Kylie Jana ones, to be honest with you. I mean, I I I'm not Gen Z. I'm more of a I'm an older millennial or what have you. So certainly not my demographic. Let's see how that plays out. Let's see whether the bare bones functionality trumps the celebrity partnership side of things. Now The Snap specs are a different prospect. So ⁓ Evan Spiegel, who's the CEO of Snap, is married to a supermodel. I forget which. You're better with your celebrity gossip than I am. But they launched those with a bunch of ⁓ fashion models, advertising them and so on. They are horrible to look at. I don't think there's a world where anybody could conceivably say those are fashion items. Now, could they successfully do an AirPods, do a dynamic island notch sort of thing where it becomes cool because they look bad. Maybe. That's that that's that's certainly that. But the interesting part about the snap specs is they are insanely expensive because they're probably the first successful iteration of somebody really doing augmented reality. So they have a display in them, which well that's which one thing that the meta Glasses don't have, although there is a meta-rayband display version, which is a lot more expensive. They're the first true light augmented reality in the sense that you are overlaying digital information on the real world. Now, I suspect Snap has its own branding problem with a lot of that side of things. I can't see that many people gravitating ⁓ towards that. But again, if people are buying these things for function, if what you want is A camera on your face and a decent pair of headphones, then there's a more accessible and affordable option for you. If what you want is like the bleeding edge of what can be accomplished with proper augmented reality, then there's an option for you there as well. So I guess wearables are diverging, ⁓ certainly a price point and definitely a functionality level. I think we'll see branding start to matter less and less. How that plays out for the Google Gentlemanster Wobby Parker partnership, we'll see. speaker-0: The next story features a brand that's been in the headlines a lot over the past couple of years. So Essence, the online multi-retailer, filed for bankruptcy protection in August 2025, I believe. And then at the start of this year, they got ownership retention for their business. Really interesting, this week they've been in the headlines again. Specifically, it was a report or an article from The Logic, and they were explaining how Essence has just let go of a lot of their created team. So, this is photographers, makeup artists, and also photo retouches as well. They were putting this down to the fact that they've just incorporated more AI into their creative workflows. This is kind of a typical story that we're hearing more and more, but the most interesting part of what the logic reported is that apparently Essence said that by incorporating AI, they're able to create a more distinct visual language and point of view that's gonna help their business. I really wanted to get your take on doing. we believe this? Do we think it's true? Or do you think it's just a way for the business to cut costs since they are struggling a lot in the past few years? speaker-1: Yeah, this is a really interesting one because you have a business that's really been through the ringer. and it's been through the ringer because multi-brand retail ⁓ online has been proven to be a very difficult model to make work well ⁓ and to establish any kind of differentiation in. Hundred percent this will be to cut costs. ⁓ and the thing I actually like about this story, so it is reporting from a single publication that we haven't been able to find validation for elsewhere. So they take this with some some amount of salt, although they do seem to have spoken to people who directly work within essence. So I it it seems believable. Now, it's at least honest, is what I will say. ⁓ like you will you will quite often see brands who will say, Well, we are using generative AI in our consumer-facing content, whether we label it or not, whether it's mandatory to label it or not. but we're still keeping photographers on staff, we're still keeping makeup artists on staff, we're still keeping lighting teams on staff, or we're still keeping the contracts that we have with studios and agencies that do that kind of work. I don't understand how a brand can say, Well, I'm turning to generative AI for all of my consumer facing content creation because it's cheaper at a unit economic level than photography is, but I'm still gonna maintain everything else. I feel like that's a lip service thing that's gonna play out badly over time. You also see the same thing from the technology providers here. You you see people saying, this is not a replacement for models, this is not a replacement for photographers, this is a way for creative directors to do different things. I struggle to square that circle. If ⁓ ev every brand is a commercial enterprise, if photography is that much of a cost center that it's so compelling to automate it and to have it done this way. Then eventually you will lose those people and those skill sets will start to disappear. ⁓ so it again, so it's it's at least honest in this instance. And as a company that has had a checkered few years, ⁓ I think it's that's absolutely the reason behind a lot of this. Now, the distinct point of view thing is interesting to me because it suggests that there's was some kind of limitation or issue in the way that they were approaching photography. ⁓ in in the traditional means. I think if you couldn't establish a clean and consistent and unique and differentiated point of view using the traditional tools, I don't see how using AI, which just replicates the traditional tools and gives you Ursatz versions of it. I don't see how that gets you ⁓ a a a distinct point of view. Except if what you want is to consolidate and centralize Creative decision-making power in the hands of a small number of people rather than distributing it across a massive pool of people. I could see that companies like this and others might have had a too many cooks situation where you are trying to produce a clear and distinct visual identity. You're trying to do it with people who worked with you or alongside you for a long time. Everybody has their own opinions, everybody's getting pulled in different directions. Compared to that and contrasted with that, if you want to just Give a marketing director or creative director full reign to go and generate all of this stuff, you will get a more consistent and individualized point of view. ⁓ I would argue that you still need all of the traditional photography skills and expertise and input and all of that stuff ⁓ that you would get otherwise. But it's it's an interesting one that's because it is so honest about an area that I feel like a lot of people are dishonest about. speaker-0: Next is a super interesting story about REI, which is a multi-brand sports and outdoor retailer. They basically got a lot of hate this week online after their customers noticed that they'd used AI-generated imagery for one of their ad campaigns on social media. Specifically, the image that sparked all of this hate promoted a bike brand called Van Rissel. And it showcased a woman standing outside with a bike, but the bike itself had two handlebars on either side, so obviously an AI-generated image. Consumers were particularly annoyed because they thought it went against the brand's sustainability ethos. But really interestingly, when the brand was confronted, they said and they kind of put the blame back. on Meta, saying that they were automatically enrolled into Meta's personalized AI program and this is what caused the inaccurate image. I wanted to get your take on, again, do we believe this? Do we think it's true? It seems a bit confusing how this could happen. Like surely a brand would have control or visibility on this. speaker-1: Okay, so I do believe it. ⁓ and the reason I believe it is REI have very good credentials and very, very strict criteria for the brands that they will stock. People are mad at them because they feel like it breaks a promise, ⁓ it breaks a retail promise. Now, I've seen REIs like intake documents and things before, and they are rigorous. So this is a company that actually does care about the products that it stocks. So from that point of view, I believe it. From the other point of view, people who criticize this kind of thing, ⁓ you should ask yourself that do you think a brand cares that little? about their external communication, that they would let an image pass scrutiny where a bike had two sets of handlebars. That suggests that every company is incredibly lazy about what they market. Now I'm sure some are, like no without question, I'm sure that's there. I don't believe that REI is that is that company. I believe that it's the kind of company that controls its narrative the same way that it controls its assortment and controls the products that it stocks. I think in general people need to kind of give brands a little credit. in these areas ⁓ and and recognize that if they've prided themselves on what they stock and how they communicate in the past, I don't think that's suddenly going to change with the advent of AI. So if you do believe it, what do you believe happened? Now this is an ad that ran on Meta's ⁓ ad network, ⁓ which is like a ring-fenced version of the usual kind of ⁓ demand platform programmatic ad buy sort of stuff. But it also seems to have been an output of Meta's programmatic ad creation ⁓ AI, which is so their their vision is that they they offer you the whole stack, essentially. So they will say, tell us what your products are, tell us what you're selling. We will not only pair you with people who have interest and intent and who fit the demographic for this, but we'll generate the ads for you as well. ⁓ they just give us give us one image and we'll generate fifty different variations that are aligned with people's geographies, people's backgrounds, people's ethnicities, people's preferences and and so on. So you get to something approaching personalized advertising. Now what REI are saying and what we've also heard from other brands before, ⁓ smaller brands in particular, is that this is an opt-out. So if you're in if you're part of Meta's advertising, programmatic advertising in the traditional sense, you get automatically opted into their programmatic ⁓ content creation pipeline, which again I can believe. Like if you if you if you look at the type of company Meta is and if you look at what their stated objective is with their whole ad tech stack, it is to say, we'll do the whole thing for you. ⁓ and it's I can certainly believe that it's being done on an opt-out basis. Now This is further evidence that people really don't like to see generative AI in their advertising. But it also really muddies the waters there because yes, of course you're going to be mad about a bike with two handlebars or somebody with six fingers or or what have you or somebody with an extra leg. That's not the state of the art for AI. ⁓ the state of the art for AI is the stuff you don't notice. You and I have talked about this before. It's the PDP images and videos and things that you assume are real and that are not currently labeled. If you're mad about AI, fine. And I I understand a lot of it. Direct your anger at the places where it's actually being practiced to its frontier level rather than getting so hung up on these kinds of stories. They make good headlines, but they're much more complicated and nuanced than we talked about. And they also misrepresent what AI and advertising should and does actually look like. speaker-0: So if you're watching this week's edit on YouTube or if you're in the UK or Europe, Generally, you'll know that we're experiencing a massive heat wave. In fact, this is actually the second record-breaking heat wave of 2026. And many are saying that 35, 40 degree plus summers are going to become more common. Just being in London this week and seeing how people are adapting to the heat in terms of what they wear and what they're doing, it really got me thinking about how do you think this kind of climate change is going to impact fashion as we move forward. speaker-1: Yeah, so for anyone who's not watching this on YouTube, ⁓ I look very rumpled. I'm wearing a wearing a linen shirt. I've had to close my window because somebody outside has decided to mow mow the lawn. It's about thirty degrees in this room. Thirty degrees Celsius, I should say, for American audiences. We're talking in the late nineties, ⁓ thereabouts, nineties it's been a hundred in London. That kind of heat is already changing the way that brands think about their assortments in their collections, right? So it's already changing the materials that people use. It's changing the the cuts and things that people put together. It's changing the emphasis on breathability, on relaxed fit, ⁓ and so on. It's also within like the traditional realm of things, it's also exposing the limits for companies that want to be more agile and more responsive to this kinds of things versus the ones that are. So if you are set up to produce hundreds or thousands of new styles a week and you can do it on a turnkey reactive basis. You can you can react to these kinds of things. You can get these kinds of things in stock within a meaningful time frame. You can shuffle inventory across channels and ⁓ and so on. I'm not in London. I'm in Manchester, but I imagine if you go into a shop in London, ⁓ anyone worth their salt will have done a lot of like merchandise reallocation and store repositioning to put all of the lightweight garments and things Right near the entrance, I've seen a lot of people carrying umbrellas to stay out of the sun, which is a first in the UK, I will say for me. ⁓ so presumably that's happening in London as well. So it's it's it's manifesting itself in the traditional like product design, development, assortment building side of things. The other places we're gonna see this manifest are more in the like heat tech sort of areas. So everyone out on the street is carrying fans, ⁓ little handheld battery-powered fans. The more forward planning prescient amongst us and the richer amongst us have kind of like neck mounted fans or ⁓ you've seen like shark shark ninja who make everything make like a chill pill, which is like a handheld fan, but it's also has like a cool plate that you're designed to put around your body. all of that stuff is like independent technology right now. You and I talked last week about the ⁓ the beauty in the ⁓ cosmetics industry being able to sell devices and how fashion doesn't have the opportunity to sell devices quite as much. It does now. Like fashion has the opportunity to forge partnerships and build its own branded versions of these kinds of independent standalone devices. It also has the opportunity to start to integrate more of these features into garments as well. ⁓ like I am sure plenty of people would buy a garment that had one of the Sony kind of neck mounted fans in it that blow hair into into your shirt. ⁓ I feel like that's that's a fast emerging category. I'll close by saying it is very hot here. I'm also very glad we're not in France or it's about to be Germany or somewhere else where it's where it is even hotter. ⁓ so I think generally speaking, Europe ⁓ is is going through a process whereby our summertime climate is changing pretty markedly. We do not have air conditioning. ⁓ there's there's definitely a lot of back and forth about that in France at the moment. That creates a potentially pretty captive market for fashion brands that want to tackle this, whether it's through branding. standalone stuff are starting to integrate more heat tech into into their garments because we're certainly not gonna get air conditioning in every home in France and Germany and Italy and the UK within the next decade. It's gonna take a lot longer than that. I think speaker-0: This is the first year that I've wanted a handheld fan, so I'm really interested to see how this evolves. Yeah. speaker-1: And if you want to sell me a shirt with a fan built into it, I would I will buy it. I will make that commitment here and now. Grace, it's been fun talking to you for another week. ⁓ looking forward to next week when I am making a fairly confident prediction that we'll have to. Thank you. speaker-0: Amazing, thanks Ben.