Social media users are trying to 'deplatform' celebrities by blocking them. Is it working?

A newly coined word has been making the rounds on social media this past week: the “digitine.”

The term, an abbreviation of “digital guillotine,” went viral in the wake of the 2024 Met Gala. It has been used by many social media users as a call to unfollow or block celebrities who have not been vocal about their stance on the Israel-Hamas war.

The word “digitine” appears to have been first used by a TikTok user who was blasting an influencer for referencing Marie Antoinette in a Met Gala post.

Celebrities have been proponents of digital boycotts, like in 2020, when A-listers like Kim Kardashian and Katy Perry announced a 24-hour boycott of Instagram for Stop Hate for Profit Campaign, organized to put a stop to misinformation and hate speech on Meta projects.

This time, though, celebrities and their influence — and how they choose to wield it — are the target.

Read on to learn more about how the “digitine” movement began, and media experts’ views on how a digital boycott can affect celebrities.

What sparked the ‘Digitine’ movement on social media?

The phrase “digitine” appears to have been coined by a TikTok user in the wake of the 2024 Met Gala in New York City.

A few days after the May 6 gala, which saw many celebrities walking the red carpet in elaborate couture looks, a woman who uses the handle @ladyfromtheoutside on TikTok posted a video criticizing celebrities for not using their platforms and privilege to help people in need.

“It’s time for the people to conduct what I want to call a ‘digital guillotine.’ A ‘digitine,’ if you will. It’s time to block all the celebrities, influencers and wealthy socialites who are not using their resources to help those in dire need,” she said in her video.

“We gave them their platforms. It’s time to take it back, take our views away, our likes, our comments, our money, by blocking them on all social media and digital platforms,” she continued.

The TikTok user went on to name the first person she wished to target in the ‘digitine’ movement: Haley Kalil, an influencer and model who recently posted a video of herself wearing a Marie Antoinette-style gown before the Met Gala.

TODAY.com has reached out to Kalil and has not heard back at the time of publication.

Kalil's original video has since been deleted, but clips of her video posted by other TikTok users show that the influencer used an audio clip from the 2006 film, “Marie Antoinette,” including the line, “Let them eat cake," as she posed in her 18th-century style floral gown.

(As a side note, the "let them eat cake" quote is popularly attributed to Marie Antoinette, often shared as evidence of her callous attitude toward starving peasants, but historians do not believe Antoinette actually spoke these words. Marie Antoinette was executed by guillotine during the French Revolution's Reign of Terror in 1793)

“Haley: For your ignorant decision to attend the $75,000 ticket Met Gala and recite ‘Let them eat cake,’ while you have done nothing with your 10 million follower platform as people are starving or dying, we sentence you to the digitine,” the TikTok user @ladyfromtheoutside continued in her video.

She finished her video with an image of Kalil being unfollowed, accompanied by a slicing blade sound effect and the spoken message, “Vive la révolution.”

After this “digitine” video went viral, Kalil responded in her own TikTok video. She clarified that she did not actually attend the 2024 Met Gala, but rather interviewed celebrities prior to the event.

Kalil also noted that the audio clip she used from “Marie Antoinette” was a popular trending sound on TikTok at the time, and that she had not intended to cause offense by using the audio clip.

“I need to apologize. I am so, so, so sorry that I chose a sound that you guys could ever possibly feel was malicious in nature. If I had thought for even one second that the sound would be received that way, I never ever, ever, ever, ever, ever would have used it,” she said.

“When I film my TikToks, I love to use trending audios and sounds that people are currently using, and this was one of them,” she continued.

Kalil also pushed back against the accusation that her Marie Antoinette-inspired video signified a lack of compassion for global inequality or people’s suffering.

“The sound choice truly had no deeper meaning. I never would have chosen a sound on purpose to highlight wealth disparity or elitism,” she said. “I never even thought it would be taken in that way because I wasn’t elite enough to even be invited to the Met Gala.”

Why are people blocking celebrities en masse?

TikTok user @ladyontheoutside’s video soon went viral and inspired others on social media to name celebrities they wanted to add to a “digitine” list.

Several posts, many of which used the hashtags #digitine or #Blockout2024, criticized celebrities who had not spoken publicly about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The Israeli-Hamas began after Hamas launched an attack on Israeli civilians on October 7, killing about 1,200 people and taking about 250 hostage. Since the Oct. 7 attack, over 35,000 people in Gaza have been killed by Israeli attacks.

One TikTok user shared a video that spliced footage of celebrities on the Met Gala red carpet with footage of bombing and Gaza protests. The video was set to the song “The Hanging Tree” from “The Hunger Games: Mockingjay — Part 1.” The “Hunger Games” has been invoked as people compared the Met Gala to the Capitol, the region in the fictional book where elites lived.

“Digitine (digital guillotine) list of all the celebrities who attended the Met Gala during dystopian times,” she wrote in the caption, adding the hashtag #freepalestine.

These posts came after a group of pro-Palestinian protestors attempted to interrupt the Met Gala, NBC News reported. The “digitine” initiative also comes against the backdrop of widespread campus protests against the Israel-Hamas war at dozens of universities across the country in recent weeks, including Columbia University and UCLA.

“There’s a massive #Blockout2024 taking place where we block every celebrity that hasn’t spoken up about Palestine or called for a ceasefire,” oneperson wrote on X. “It’s a global movement. They live off of our attention. If they don’t have any, they cease to exert their influence.”

The recent video posted by Kalil, and the viral response it inspired, seems to have sparked a new wave of protests on the digital front.

“‘Let them eat cake’ is the phrase that broke the camel’s back,” a TikTok user with the username @itzkennyg said in a recent video. “The thing is, I don’t think (Haley Kalil) realized that she sparked a revolution.”

He continued, “We gave them a platform and they spit in our faces. Stop idolizing these people.”

TikToker @adonaicaimmoloch summed it up by saying, “Block every celebrity ... these people have all the opportunity to make change in this world. Instead of talking their platform to talk about s--- that matters, they use it to make money ... Our attention allows them the wealth of their reality. We can deny that to them by just ignoring them.”

In addition to unfollowing celebrities, one TikTok user urged others to boycott famous figures by “not watching their shows and movies, and not listening to their music.”

Are digital boycotts effective? Experts weigh in

Do digital boycotts like the “digitine” movement actually affect celebrities and influencers?

Blair Huddy, a public relations professional and the founder and CEO of Hudson Davis Communications, weighed in on how losing existing followers, as well as being blocked by non-followers, could have an impact on social media creators.

In a statement to TODAY.com, Huddy explained that many celebrities and influencers are paid by the number of views they receive per post, so losing followers and being blocked could “hurt their earning by ensuring their content is not shown as widely.”

Huddy also noted that creators can negotiate rates for posts depending on their following. So, for example, an influencer with 100,000 social media followers could charge more money for a sponsored post than an influencer with 5,000 or 10,000 followers.

“With a loss of followers they (brands) won’t have as much exposure to a sizable audience so they won’t be willing to pay as much for said exposure,” Huddy said.

That said, Huddy also noted that it would take “substantial losses (of followers) or blocks to make an impact, in the hundreds of thousands or more.”

She also said some celebrities pay for followers “to keep their perceived audience or presence,” so being unfollowed by real fans may not affect all celebrities’ bottom line in the same way.

Tenyse Williams, a public relations expert and adjunct instructor specialist at Columbia University and George Washington University, also says losing large amounts of followers could send a message to public figures.

“Celebrities often have millions of followers, and losing a few may not seem like a big deal,” Williams told TODAY.com in a statement. “However, if they lose a significant number of followers, especially from a particular audience, it sends a clear signal that people are unhappy with their actions.

“Digital protests can be a powerful tool to hold public figures accountable for their behavior and actions,” Williams added. “If a substantial number of people participate in such protests, it can lead to a broader discussion about the role of public figures in shaping societal norms and values.”

Topsie VandenBosch, a licensed psychotherapist and emotional intelligence consultant, told TODAY.com that "follower counts" often represent celebrities' "influence, marketability, likability and respectability," in addition to earning potential. Losing followers is a "multi-layered thread," jeopardizing brand deals and also undermining "their perceived moral authority and influence."

VandenBosch said a digital boycott could lead them to change their views or actions.

“A mass unfollowing can cause famous figures to re-examine their beliefs and behaviors to realign with societal expectations and avoid further scrutiny and backlash,” she told TODAY.com in an email.

While not commenting specifically on the “digitine” movement, writer and commentator Derek Guy also shared his views on X about why The Met Gala should not be dismissed as a merely “frivolous” event.

The Met Gala, whose official name is The Costume Benefit Institute, is a fundraiser for the Metropolitan Museum of Art's Costume Institute.

In his lengthy X thread, Guy argued that while “one can reasonably criticize” the “excess” of the Gala, both in terms of “the price of the tickets and the clothes,” the event should not be wholly dismissed as an elitist indulgence.

“Fashion is often unduly criticized because it has historically been coded as frivolous and feminine,” he wrote. “'Masculine’ interests such as architecture are considered ‘legitimate,’ while fashion is considered ‘frivolous’ and ‘dumb.’

"Fashion is integral to culture because it relates to how people — of all genders — express themselves,” he added. “It also involves craft.”

This article was originally published on TODAY.com