In August 2025, UK-based cosmetics brand Made By Mitchell faced mounting criticism after its founder, Mitchell Halliday, was publicly accused of ghosting and exploiting a competition winner. The allegations, which surfaced on social media, quickly gained traction within the beauty community, prompting widespread debate about influencer-led brands and accountability.
The Competition That Sparked the Controversy
Earlier this year, Made By Mitchell announced an online competition with big prize packages. According to the promotional materials for the competition, the lucky winner would receive money to help them get started, a chance to work with a mentor, and be featured with the chance of collaborating with Made By Mitchell.
The competition generated lots of activity, with thousands of responses submitted for the sake of new makeup artists and beauty lovers. When the winner was finally revealed, the brand recognized the winner by publicly announcing it and showing how they were architects of their creation.
However, months later, the winner alleged that key aspects of the promised prize were never fulfilled.
Allegations of Ghosting
The winner stated in several posts circulating from early August that there was little communication after the brand made its public announcement and held photo opportunities. The winner alleged that none of the follow-up emails or messages inquiring about prize fulfillment received a response. While the winner indicated that some minor components of the prize have been delivered, major components like the financial support and commitments to collaborate have been delayed or not delivered at all.
Screenshots of messages and timelines were shared online, prompting followers to question the transparency of the brand’s promotional campaigns.
Social Media Reaction
The beauty community reacted swiftly. Supporters of the competition winner expressed disappointment, arguing that smaller creators often rely on such opportunities for career advancement. Many emphasized that publicly celebrating a winner while allegedly failing to deliver promised rewards could be damaging both professionally and emotionally.
Critics accused the brand of using the competition primarily for engagement and marketing, rather than genuinely supporting emerging talent. The term “exploitation” began trending in comment sections, with some users calling for greater oversight of influencer-run contests.
On the other hand, loyal fans of Made By Mitchell urged caution, suggesting there may have been misunderstandings, logistical delays, or contractual nuances not visible to the public.
Brand and Founder Response
As pressure mounted, Mitchell Halliday addressed the allegations through a statement posted to the brand’s social media channels. He denied intentionally ghosting the winner and stated that certain aspects of the prize were delayed due to scheduling conflicts and internal restructuring.
The statement emphasized that the company values transparency and fairness and claimed efforts were being made to resolve the matter privately. However, critics argued that the response lacked specificity and did not fully clarify which commitments had been met or remained outstanding.
The controversy continued to circulate, with influencers and industry commentators weighing in on the importance of clear terms and written agreements in promotional contests.
Broader Industry Implications
Marketing professionals observe that beauty brands increasingly use influencer-hosted competitions to gain exposure. These types of competitions may offer prizes such as mentorships, brand partnerships, and payment for the highest active engagement and best viral participation.
In addition to this, the Made By Mitchell incident demonstrates that there are significant risks associated with competitions where the expectations of participants are not clearly established or adhered to. In a world in which consumers rely heavily on having social proof (e.g., testimonials) and complete transparency, even minor examples of inequity can have devastating effects on the reputation of a brand.
Lastly, legal experts caution that depending on the location, there are advertising and consumer protection laws that may apply to contests and giveaways. Therefore, failing to honour prizes advertised through promotional competitions can raise both ethical issues and regulatory issues.
Reputation at Stake
The rumoured issue with the popular makeup brand Made by Mitchell has prompted a wider discussion on the power imbalance between smaller influencers and larger, more established brands. Influencers who don’t have the same resources or means to hold larger brands accountable will likely rely on public exposure as their primary means of accountability.
Moving forward, how these allegations are settled will determine if this will be an amicable resolution or a protracted dispute. The controversy should give brands running competitions a clear understanding of the need for clear, transparent written agreements and the importance of timely communication.
The beauty industry depends heavily on creating digital engagement strategies, and would not survive without the trust of consumers — it may take only days for that trust to be eroded or lost entirely by 2025.
