Crisis Communication: An Opinionated Case Study on Balenciaga’s Ad Controversy and Turbulent Recovery
Precisely a year ago, in November of last year, Balenciaga had one of its most prominent social media campaign issues. Founded in San Sebastian, Spain by Spanish designer Cristóbal Balenciaga in 1918, the high-fashion brand itself is known for its “unique aesthetic, which combines avant-garde design elements with a high-fashion sensibility, creating bold, statement-making pieces that are both striking and wearable.” — HighSnobiety.com (Global fashion and lifestyle brand’s e-commerce website.)
The problem arose on November 16th, 2022, after Balenciaga published a social media campaign entitled, “Baleciaga Gift Shop.” Now, the objective was to drive a new audience segmentation of customers to the luxury brand: Toddlers and kids. Presumably target marketed towards parents, the fashion brand went with the intention of introducing a new niche, possibly children’s luxury-fashion. A photographer, Galien Galimberti, photographed six children with clutched teddy bears and handbags, aiming for a creative shoot, as fashion companies generally do release visual ads of that sort; however, with a darker, or maybe edgier implicated twist. The destroyed teddy bears (perhaps illustrated for the sake of creative edginess) and dull eyes on the stuffed animals, as well as leather belts and harnesses on the stuffed toys gave the wrong message to the public… and not long after, it was not received well at all by not only fashion-lovers but the general public too. The juxtaposed children with the toys gave the wrong impression and I’m not surprised that the world did not agree with its social media cryptic messaging that was implied through the photographic illustration. A few days later on November 21st, more images were released in a separate campaign by Balenciaga with small but noticeable imagery featuring paperwork from a Supreme Court decision regarding a taboo topic involving children.
The controversy got discussed on Late Night TV, which are generally comedic in nature, and shows like “Tucker Carlson Tonight” on Fox News as well as The New York Post.
How did Balenciaga deal with this definite brand and social media campaign crisis reaction? They issued a public apology statement:
“We apologize for displaying unsettling documents in our campaign,” the statement said. “We take this matter very seriously and are taking legal action against the parties responsible for creating the set and including unapproved items for our Spring 23 campaign photo shoot.”
There was still an uproar and a lawsuit against the Production Company was put into place.
That was the gist of what happened in Balenciaga’s controversial campaign late last year.
Do I think this could have been avoided? Most certainly, but with understanding and sympathy that this may not have been the actual intention of the creative director or art director involved with this shoot. While the second campaign prop afterwards seems a little bizarre and inappropriate (documents regarding children), the first campaign could have completely been a mistake and unintentional. I firsthand would never want to be “cancelled” for a mistake I make if it was not what was intended. Perhaps the creative director wanted to be creative and completely missed the unusualness of the visual. I think in this day and age it is important to be empathetic and stand in one’s shoes to see what they may have thought in the process. Maybe the photographer wanted to explore another creative facet not realizing it was misusing the matter at hand. On the other side of the coin, this very much could have been avoided with a second, third, or fourth look by other publishers. When releasing a professional campaign, especially with a brand of that stature, it is important to review every material released so situations like these don’t occur. More reviews in the editing process could have very much been executed.
Was it the fault of the brand or were there other circumstances that caused it? Part of me wants to think that it was a sheer mistake so yes, there may have been other circumstances that caused it like careless creative direction, but the props on the second campaign come off inappropriate.
Did the way they managed the crisis help or hinder the brand image? The Garde-Robe campaign apology was morally right for the predicament at hand but was not helpful thereafter, as the company was sued for a lawsuit of $25 million on November 25th of 2022. The brand image suffered as well reputation-wise.
For the most part, when companies make mistakes like these, ethically speaking, an apology is appropriate and the right way to go but it is not always going to help the cause. I don’t think there was anything more Balenciaga could do but issue an apology and take down the campaign from its social platforms. I think redemption should be considered in a world of “cancel culture” as unpopular as it may be to say that. No human is perfect, and the individual involved very well may not have been aware of what they were doing and in my opinion, be granted vindication if it came from a place of innocence and blissful unawareness.
Fashion is glitz and glam but fashion fallouts may not be all that jazz. Until next time readers, stay cautious out there!
