The purpose of this essay is to study how influencers negotiate authenticity and credibility through language and self-presentation when facing public criticism. As influencers appear in a digital public sphere where the lines between private and professional communication are increasingly blurred, public criticism means challenges for their self-presentation and experienced legitimacy. This study is a qualitative case study of two Swedish influencers, Matilda Djerf and Margaux Dietz, both of whom have faced extensive public criticism. The empirical material consists of 72 texts collected from social media platforms and traditional media. The texts are gathered both before and after the respective crises. The analysis is theory-driven and draws on theoretical concepts related to self-presentation, framing, and image repair. The results show that influencers strategically shift between private and professional positions to manage criticism as well as trying to influence audience interpretations. Private positioning is primarily used to signal vulnerability and intimacy, while professional positioning shows responsibility and control. Authenticity is not only a naturally occurring trait, but something that is constructed through audience interaction. Furthermore, the study demonstrates that audience relations are dynamic and characterized by ongoing exchanges of power, in which influencers public trust can both be strengthened and undermined through communicative choices. Differences between the cases indicate that brand characteristics and the nature of the criticism influence both the development of the crisis and the possibilities for restoring credibility. Overall, the study highlights how language and self-presentation function as central resources in influencers' crisis communication and how trust, authenticity and responsibility are constructed on social media.