Snapchat comes under fire for ‘digital blackface’ filter that turns you into Bob Marley
and failed miserably Emily Dreyfuss / Wired : Marijuana Memo: Seriously, Guys. Do We Even Need 420 Anymore? Tweets: The Next Web / @thenextweb : Following Snapchat backlash, MSQRD's quietly removed its Bob Marley filter for new users http://thenextweb.com/... http://twitter.com/... Ingrid Nilsen / @ingridnilsen : Very disappointed in you, @Snapchat. The Bob Marley filter is not only an insult to the memory of this man, but to people of color as well. @bitchmedia : Snapchat introduces a 4/20 filter that's “the digital equivalent of blackface.” http://www.theguardian.com/... Jozen C. / @jozenc : Just because Bob Marley's estate let Snapchat use that filter doesn't mean it's right. It's an ill-advised move, period. Alex Hern / @alexhern : We asked Snapchat “what were you thinking?!” They didn't answer, but did say this: http://www.theguardian.com/... http://twitter.com/... Hargecore Henry / @brittonlowe : The stupidest thing that could have happened today happened. http://twitter.com/... Alex Heath / @alexeheath : Here's Snapchat's comment on the Bob Marley filter everyone is upset over. Doesn't look like they're gonna remove it http://www.techinsider.io/... Thanks: @alexeheath
Context & Ripple Effects
Snapchat launched a 4/20-themed lens that overlays Bob Marley's face, dreadlocks, and skin tone onto users, and the rollout immediately drew 'digital blackface' criticism from users and press — even though, per the relationships in play, the Bob Marley estate had reportedly cleared the filter's use. Rival MSQRD, which offered its own Marley effect, moved within a day to quietly remove it for new users.
This is not a one-off: it opens a recurring failure mode for Snapchat's lens business. Four months later the company pulled a 'yellowface' anime lens after similar user backlash, and by 2020 it was apologizing for and disabling a Juneteenth filter that, Snap admitted, never went through its normal review process.
First-order effects
- Snapchat absorbs a reputational hit at the exact moment the 4/20 lens is meant to drive engagement, with critics framing the filter as an insult to Marley's memory and to people of color.
- MSQRD is forced to scrub its own Bob Marley filter for new users within hours of the backlash, showing how quickly contagion spreads across competing filter catalogs.
Second-order effects
- Estate licensing proves insufficient cover: permission from the Bob Marley estate did not prevent the backlash, so Snapchat and rivals learn that likeness rights and cultural acceptability are separate approvals — pushing filter pipelines toward internal review layers rather than legal sign-off alone.
- Competitors building face-effect libraries now treat racialized and identity-transforming lenses as a liability category, raising the bar for what gets shipped during culturally loaded moments like 4/20.
Third-order effects
- If the pattern holds — Marley 2016, anime yellowface, the unreviewed Juneteenth filter — face-filter platforms institutionalize pre-launch review boards for identity-affecting effects, making cultural vetting a standing cost of operating an AR lens catalog rather than a reactive scramble.
- Identity-morphing lenses become a governed product category: the same technology that later drew mixed-but-largely-positive reactions in the gender-changing filter episode shows these effects carry both social value and social risk, forcing platforms to distinguish exploratory uses from caricature.
The trend: Consumer AR is turning human identity into editable content, and each backlash pushes filter platforms from ad-hoc launches toward formalized review and approval systems for identity-affecting lenses.