Courting public outrage for publicity doesn’t help anyone or anything
Viral marketing and public outrage seem to be all the rage in the digital age and unfortunately, we may be seeing the darker sides of viral marketing schemes to try and drum up publicity. I’m of course talking about the high fashion brands — Gucci, Prada and most recently Burberry who have landed themselves in hot water over controversial, supposedly racist clothes or clothes that evoked racist imagery.
Guccis’ Jumper-gate featured a black pull up jumper which quite clearly resembles old-timey blackface imagery, specifically that of the Minstrel, racist caricatures of black people that originated in the 19th century. There were calls for boycotts of Guccis’ products from prominent black voices across the internet including rapper T.I. and 50 Cent and it’s safe to say the company isn’t being viewed in the best light currently. This is despite Alessandro Michele — creative director for Gucci, stating that offence was never intended by the product.
And most recently Burberry has apologized for a hoody featuring a noose hanging around it, with clear implications of suicide and or lynching but the thing is, it’s gotten to the point that brands can’t simply claim ignorance.
Ignorance would be having little to no ethnic minority representation in creative roles, looking over or helping to approve product launches, on the other hand — arrogance and naivety is launching a hoody with a noose and the question is, what could possess someone to think this was a great idea? And how could no one stop the idea from coming to reality at any stage in the creative process?
These same questions are asked time and again, but the results always seem to be the same, with said controversial product launching, creating a backlash, calls for boycotts arise and are mostly being forgotten in the months after, not majorly affecting the said companies bottom lines but ironically the controversy seems to do the opposite. We saw the exact same thing happen in early 2018 with the H&M best monkey in the jumper controversy and I’d think it’s safe to say that H&M has done fairly okay since then.
The problem being that despite each new controversy and learning period for a fashion retailer and brand, they all seem to continue to make the same ‘mistakes’ and savvy observers have noticed the trend, could these brands simply be taking advantage of outrage culture and using cynical marketing to get their names in the news and sell more? Supposedly all publicity is good publicity and the results of public backlashes of big brands almost always shows no significant downturn in profit but the opposite, the outrage seems to work in their favour, so why would they stop? Just look up some of the hilariously tone-deaf clothes designs that Urban Outfitters has launched over the years both for a laugh and to see that some big brands simply court controversy, maybe in their minds to be edgy and to stand out in a crowded, ever competitive market.
I understand that I’m looking at this as cynically as the creative director who is thinking up the next clearly racially charged jumper or T-shirt to drum up controversy is. But if the people behind these products really are using viral marketing to this extent, it’s shameful and a clear show of how far some brands will go for publicity via manipulating public outrage.
It’s not a stretch to say big brands have used outrage or poorly thought out publicity stunts to promote products in the past, so what’s a little racist imagery to Gucci or Prada if it doesn’t negatively affect their bottom dollar?
I certainly hope the answer is ignorance over cynical marketing plots but with each new controversy, I start to doubt the supposed innocence of said offensive products. Racism — historical or otherwise isn’t trendy, edgy or prime material for viral marketing and it definitely won’t make your brand more appealing either.
