Islamic Legal Analysis of Income Earned from Destructive Honest Reviews by Food Influencers

Abstract

The phenomenon of destructive honest reviews by food influencers on social media has raised legal and moral problems within the digital economic ecosystem. This study aims to examine the halal status of income derived from destructive reviews of culinary products from the perspective of Islamic law, emphasizing the principles of fiqh muamalah and digital da'wah ethics. The research employs a normative-analytic qualitative method based on a literature study of classical and contemporary fiqh works, DSN-MUI fatwas, and actual cases such as the controversy between Codeblu and Clairmont Bakery. The analysis reveals that although honesty is a fundamental value in Islam, honesty conveyed destructively—without regard for ethics, consent, and social impact—constitutes ghibah and fitnah, both of which are prohibited. Income generated from such content is deemed haram because it originates from acts that cause economic and social harm, contradicting the principles of halalan thayyiban and the legal maxim lā ḍarara wa lā ḍirār (no harm and no reciprocating harm). Conversely, criticism expressed politely and aimed at improving business quality can be considered a form of amar ma‘rūf that brings benefit (maṣlaḥah). Therefore, this study emphasizes the necessity of applying Sharia-based ethics and moral responsibility in influencer marketing practices to ensure alignment with maqāṣid al-syarī‘ah, particularly in preserving dignity, economic justice, and the blessing of sustenance (barakah al-rizq).