Instagram users know these posts well - pictures of beach babes posing with beauty products or buff blokes flexing with protein powder.
A year after new guidelines were introduced to clarify when sponsored content on social media should be declared, AAP can reveal the national advertising watchdog has received fewer than 20 complaints about breaches, and all were dismissed.
Nevertheless, advertisers insist self-regulation is working and there's no need to tighten the rules.
The industry argues the desire to appear "trustworthy" generally keeps social media users in line, and many advertising law experts agree.
"Influencers" are prominent social media users who are typically sent free products or are paid in exchange for posting about brands.
The Australian Association of National Advertisers in March 2017 inserted a clause into its code of ethics encouraging influencers to make sponsored content "clearly distinguishable as such to the relevant audience".
AANA chief executive John Broome argues the change has resulted in greater awareness by brands, agencies and influencers.
"Most social media influencers or bloggers understand that to retain their influence they must maintain the trust of their followers," he told AAP.
"Self-interest ought to dictate that they are transparent about their relationships with brand owners."
The guidelines are voluntary and contain no specific method for influencers to declare advertising. Many use hashtags such as "#ad".
Industry umpire Ad Standards adjudicates complaints and Mr Broome says that's an additional "powerful incentive" for influencers to do the right thing because breaches garner significant media attention.
Since the new clause targeting influencers was introduced 19 complaints have been lodged and dismissed.
One involved a post about a body board by Schapelle Corby while actor Kat Risteska drew the ire of an Instagram follower with an endorsement of moisturiser.
If a user is found to have broken the rules they are asked to remove the post. However, consumer law also applies in the influencer space.
Mr Broome insists the combination of self-regulation and consumer law "serves the Australian consumer very well".
Consumer watchdog the ACCC says legislation broadly prohibits "misleading or deceptive conduct" and a person can be in breach if they are paid to promote a service without making that clear to an ordinary consumer.
But, to date, there hasn't been a single consumer law case brought against an influencer or brand.
Lawyer Clint Fillipou believes it would be "a stretch" to say an influencer who falls foul of the AANA code would also have breached consumer law given they're separate mechanisms.
The Anisimoff Legal specialist believes the existing system of self-regulation is working well enough. He doesn't see the need for a mandated disclosure mechanism.
"Australian consumers are very bright and younger consumers of advertising are much sharper than we may give them credit for," Mr Fillipou told AAP.
"The fact there hasn't been a litany of upheld complaints and consumers are not screaming for change is a good thing. It implies the code is working - not the opposite."
Influencer agency HooZu ensures the declaration of sponsored content is written into their contracts but chief executive Nathan Ruff also cites "trust" as being key.
"Influencers obviously producing and distributing branded content without declaring it are diminishing the trust of their audience and subsequently the value of their endorsement," Mr Ruff told AAP.
"Influencers are at the mercy of their followers or audience and this accountability, combined with the current regulations, is a system that already works well. No change is needed."
