The comical geniuses over at College Humor recently released a new short video that is capturing the attention of many across the internet due to its comedy, but even more so due to its factual backing. The 4 minute video takes us through the history of the engagement ring, a material good that so many of us now both associate and expect as a “symbol of love.” The video shows us how this now commonly accepted viewpoint was molded into all of us by nothing more than an advertising campaign by the diamond juggernaut De Beers. Check it out:

The image of a man on one knee, presenting a diamond engagement ring, is deeply ingrained in modern romance. It’s often perceived as a timeless tradition, a universal symbol of eternal love. However, as laid bare in the accompanying video, this narrative is a carefully constructed myth, largely engineered by a single corporation less than a century ago: the De Beers Diamond Cartel.

Before the 1930s, diamond engagement rings were not a standard practice. De Beers, facing a saturated market of their product, launched an aggressive advertising campaign in 1938. Their goal was clear: to create an artificial demand by equating diamonds with genuine love and commitment. This campaign invented the notion that a ‘real man’ demonstrates his love through an expensive chunk of crystallized carbon. The now-infamous ‘two months’ salary’ guideline for ring expenditure? Not a historical tradition or a financial benchmark, but an arbitrary number cooked up by De Beers marketers, designed solely to inflate sales and ensure consumers spent a significant portion of their income on a product with little inherent value.

The notion of a diamond’s inherent preciousness is perhaps the greatest illusion. De Beers’ own chairman, Nicky Oppenheimer, famously admitted in 1999 that “diamonds are intrinsically worthless.” Far from being rare, gem-quality diamonds are actually quite common. Their exorbitant market price is not a reflection of scarcity but a meticulously managed supply. For decades, De Beers held a near-global monopoly on diamond mining and distribution, deliberately restricting the supply of raw diamonds to control prices. This artificial scarcity, coupled with relentless marketing, transformed a common mineral into a coveted, expensive symbol, with little to no resale value once purchased, effectively trapping consumers in a one-way transaction.

What makes this saga particularly insidious is the deep cultural embeddedness of this fabricated tradition. Even armed with the knowledge of De Beers’ century-long manipulation, many individuals feel compelled to conform. The social pressure and emotional weight attached to the diamond engagement ring are so profound that opting out is often perceived as a slight or a lack of commitment. This reveals not just a successful marketing campaign, but a powerful commentary on how corporate interests can shape societal expectations and extract wealth through manufactured desires, turning a symbol of love into a deeply ingrained financial obligation for millions.