Your most persuasive marketers don't work for you

In October, the Advertising Standards Authority and the Competition and Markets Authority published the fourth edition of their guide for influencers. The core rule hasn’t changed: if content is paid for, it has to be obviously identifiable as an advert, with a clear label such as “#ad” up front. Universities should read it carefully, because many now run student creator schemes that sit squarely within its scope.

Those schemes exist for a good reason. Applicants have always trusted other students more than they trust us. When researchers asked 1,475 UK applicants about their sources of information, only 26% rated university advertising as highly trustworthy, while campus visits and the UCAS website were each trusted by more than half. That study is a decade old, and everything about how young people search since then, from TikTok to Reddit threads, has pushed further in the same direction.

Why student voice has become a reputation issue

The most persuasive marketing a university has is a current student talking honestly about their experience. The difficulty is that it only works if it’s genuinely honest, and most institutions find that uncomfortable.

So creator programmes tend to go one of two ways. Some are so tightly scripted and approved that the content reads like an advert, and audiences discount it instantly. Others have little structure at all, which leaves students unpaid, untrained and unsure of the rules, and leaves the university exposed when a post misleads or a disclosure is missing.

The more you script a student, the less anyone believes them.

What I’d ask every head of marketing and recruitment to do

Pay student creators properly, and label it. If a student is creating content for you, it’s work. Pay them fairly and make sure paid content is clearly marked, in line with the ASA and CMA guidance. Transparency doesn’t weaken the content, but getting caught without it will.

Recruit for range, not polish. Choose students across subjects, backgrounds, routes in and year groups, including commuters, mature students and those who found the first term hard. The applicants watching want to see someone like them.

Brief on facts, then let go. Give creators accurate information on fees, support and entry requirements and a clear sense of what’s off-limits, then let them speak in their own voice. Review for accuracy, not for tone.

Listen where students talk. Monitor what’s said about you on Reddit, in reviews and in comment threads, and respond like a person rather than a press office. A helpful reply from a real member of staff often does more than a campaign.

Look after them. Creators can attract criticism and the occasional pile-on. Give them training, support and a named contact, and make it easy for them to step back.

The opportunity

Honest peer voices are the scarcest and most trusted asset in student recruitment, and they cost far less than paid media. The universities that build fair, professional and transparent creator programmes will earn trust that advertising alone can’t buy.

I’d love to hear from student creators themselves on Season 2 of the podcast, alongside the marketers who work with them, because the best programmes are being designed with students rather than for them.

Jonathan Sabarre FCIM MBA is Principal Consultant at QS Quacquarelli Symonds, a keynote speaker and host of Marketing Greats in Higher Education. Get the weekly email or invite him to speak.