The Evolution of Complex: From Culture Curator to Advertising Giant

Complex, a brand once synonymous with the pulse of hip hop, streetwear, and youth culture, is now in a pivotal stage of evolution. In a recent interview with Earn Your Leisure’s Troy and Rashad, Complex President Maka Fitzgibbons laid out the journey of the media company from its humble beginnings to its multi-layered current form. What emerged was a portrait of a brand caught in a balancing act—between culture and commerce, authenticity and profitability, fans and advertisers. In its quest to remain relevant and profitable, Complex seems to have evolved into something far more corporate than cultural. For fans and artists, this transformation raises questions about what kind of media company Complex wants to be, and whether it is still a place that truly represents hip hop.

Complex’s Early Years: An Authentic Connection to Culture

Founded in 2002, Complex began as a magazine born from the streetwear vision of Marc Ecko. It captured a new kind of audience—those equally invested in hip hop, fashion, sports, and gaming. It was a brand that merged all the elements of youth culture, reflecting a diversity of interests that resonated deeply with its readers. It wasn’t just a publication; it was a hub where streetwear enthusiasts could learn about the latest kicks, and hip hop heads could read thoughtful pieces on artists both mainstream and underground.

The early years of Complex were notable for its genuine engagement with culture, which was reflected in its commitment to storytelling and community. They covered emerging artists like Kid Cudi, Wale, and J. Cole before they hit the mainstream, and championed cultural movements such as the rise of streetwear brands like Supreme and BAPE. Complex played a significant role in shaping the narratives of artists who were breaking through, and their in-depth coverage of trends like sneaker culture helped to elevate these aspects of youth culture to mainstream awareness. For many fans, Complex was a trusted source that connected them to the culture in a meaningful way.

Corporate Takeovers and the Changing Identity of Complex

But as Complex grew, so did its aspirations, and in 2016, it was sold to Verizon and Hearst for a reported $328 million. From there, it entered a new chapter, with profitability increasingly tied to larger corporate objectives. This marked the beginning of a series of sales, each taking the company further away from its roots. By 2021, Complex was purchased by BuzzFeed for $294 million—a move that, in hindsight, didn't align well with either brand’s mission. The disconnect was evident: BuzzFeed, known for its mass-market viral content, was an awkward fit with Complex’s niche and culturally nuanced audience. The mismatch led to significant challenges for Complex, culminating in a third sale in 2024 for just $109 million to Network, an e-commerce platform. The lower valuation reflected broader shifts in the media landscape, increased competition, and difficulties in maintaining their original audience focus.

These successive buyouts and drops in valuation tell a story of a company struggling to maintain its cultural identity amid shifting ownership and business pressures. During the interview, Fitzgibbons acknowledged these challenges, admitting that under BuzzFeed, Complex’s community focus eroded, and events like Complex Con suffered from lack of investment and cultural energy. Editorially, the brand faced layoffs of key staff members who were deeply connected to the hip hop community, and there were shifts towards more generic, advertiser-friendly content. This led to a loss of the distinct editorial voice that once made Complex a unique and trusted outlet within the culture. The brand, once a youth-driven powerhouse, seemed to lose its grip on the audience it once held dear.

The Complex Business Model: Culture or Commerce?

The challenges under new ownership brought significant changes to Complex's business model, ultimately shifting its priorities away from its cultural roots. Today, Complex functions on what Fitzgibbons called a "three-legged stool" of revenue: premium content, e-commerce, and experiences. The brand has increasingly moved away from creating authentic stories to focusing on three primary revenue streams:

1. Premium Content and Advertising: Shows like "360 with Speedy Morman" and "Sneaker Shopping" have been instrumental in keeping some cultural connection alive, but the financial backbone comes from heavy sponsorship and branded integration. Recent examples like their partnership with Sprite on "Sneaker Shopping" show how they’ve balanced brand needs with culturally relevant content that still resonates with their core audience. Advertisers play a significant role in shaping the content—the very presence of a Sprite bottle in a show isn’t just by chance; it's a calculated revenue strategy. The creative direction is increasingly led by brand interests rather than cultural relevance, leading to the perception that Complex’s output is, at times, more an advertisement than genuine storytelling. However, there have been instances where Complex successfully balanced advertiser interests with culturally impactful content. For example, "Hot Ones," produced in partnership with First We Feast, has become a beloved series that authentically engages with both artists and cultural icons, maintaining a genuine connection with the audience despite sponsorship presence.

   
   

2. E-commerce: In recent years, Complex has expanded its e-commerce platform with "Shop Complex," offering exclusive drops and limited collaborations that target their fashion-conscious audience. This has allowed Complex to capitalize on the popularity of streetwear and sneaker culture, but it has also meant a shift towards becoming more transactional in nature.

   
   

3. Experiences and Events: Complex Con, an annual event bringing together music, fashion, and fans, remains a key part of their business. These experiences are supported by ticket sales, sponsorships, and on-site merchandise. The event's move to Las Vegas and expansion into international markets, such as Hong Kong, showcases Complex's aim to scale their experiential brand offerings while still maintaining cultural relevance. However, there have been instances where Complex successfully balanced advertiser interests with culturally impactful content. For example, "Hot Ones," produced in partnership with First We Feast, has become a beloved series that authentically engages with both artists and cultural icons, maintaining a genuine connection with the audience despite sponsorship presence.

The Fractured Relationship with Artists and Fans

Perhaps the most telling part of Complex’s journey is its fractured relationship with the hip hop community—a community it once championed. The days of Complex discovering new artists or being a trusted voice in hip hop seem increasingly rare. Instead, they focus on stories that are safe for brands, featuring artists with the broadest appeal or the largest fanbases, rather than taking risks on those who are emerging or need a platform. Some independent artists on social media have said, "Complex used to be the place where underground voices could get a real shot. Now, it feels like they're only interested in who can bring in the most ad dollars."

In an era where hip hop culture is evolving rapidly and fans are craving authenticity, Complex appears to be struggling to keep up. They have the platform, the history, and the infrastructure to help discover and promote new talent, but their focus on advertisers and revenue-generating content has led many to question whether Complex still represents the culture or if they are merely exploiting it.

What Does the Future Hold for Complex?

It’s clear that Complex is trying to future-proof itself—talks of memberships, deeper brand partnerships, and new monetization strategies reveal a company trying to navigate the rapidly changing media landscape. They have a loyal audience, but the real question is how long they can maintain that loyalty if they continue to prioritize commerce over culture. Fitzgibbons’ comments about retaining the "youth" audience illustrate this tension: winning 14 to 16-year-olds now will determine whether Complex stays relevant, but achieving that requires authenticity, something that can’t be faked or bought.

Recent efforts to reconnect with their cultural roots include collaborations with emerging hip hop artists and hosting smaller, community-focused events. These initiatives, while still in early stages, indicate that Complex is at least attempting to regain its original cultural relevance.

Complex’s journey is a cautionary tale for media companies. The shift from cultural curator to corporate entity is a delicate balance, and in the case of Complex, the scales seem to be tipping in favor of commerce. For the fans and artists who remember what Complex used to be, the hope remains that the brand can find its way back—or that another platform will rise to give voice to the stories and artists that are too often overlooked by corporate interests.