By Jacob Gallagher
ON THE EVENING of May 29, protests sparked by the death of
George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police officer Derek
Chauvin spread across America. In response, Nike released a
minute-long social-media video that flashed directives like "Don't
turn your back on racism," and "Don't sit back and be silent."
Competing brand Adidas promptly retweeted the ad, which has been
viewed over 20 million times across platforms, tacking on its own
message: "Together is how we move forward. Together is how we make
change." This unlikely fusing of industry rivals paved the way for
a deluge of "we care" statements from other apparel companies,
dispatched primarily over Instagram.
The next day, Saturday, Gucci posted an anti-racism proclamation
by author and activist Cleo Wade, while Reebok Instagrammed a
message that read in part, "We are not asking you to buy our shoes.
We are asking you to walk in someone else's." On Sunday, Michael
Kors posted a photo with the message "Unity Now Racism Must End,"
and on Monday morning Belgian designer Dries Van Noten and Italian
brand Valentino both posted simple "Black Lives Matter" statements.
In the days since, countless brands have followed suit.
In decades past, this kind of social-justice support from a
brand was unheard of. Even in the age of social media, apparel
companies have typically met weighty socio-political moments with
silence. If a company was willing to wade into controversial
territory, it likely did so through sexualized advertising in order
to stoke sales. In the 1990s, labels like Calvin Klein and Guess
gained notoriety for risqué ad campaigns, but stayed mum when it
came to divisive social issues. Responsibility was not seen as a
marketing device.
Among the exceptions was the Italian label United Colors of
Benetton, which ran diverse, equality-extolling ads throughout the
late 20th century. Another, the shoe brand Kenneth Cole, began
supporting causes including AIDS and gun control in powerful
advertising in the late 1980s. But for most brands and their
spokespeople, the risk of making a statement was perceived as too
high. As Nike athlete Michael Jordan said when he refused to
endorse democratic North Carolina Senate candidate Harvey Gantt in
1990, " Republicans buy sneakers too."
Thirty years later, the landscape looks quite different.
"Michael Jordan came of age when it was okay to be a capitalist and
not have any corporate social responsibility and not have to defend
your decisions with any communities of color," said Shawn Grain
Carter, professor of fashion business management at the Fashion
Institute of Technology. But, he continued, "those days are
over."
Today, socially and politically astute Gen-Zers and millennials
force brands to take a public position on issues of gender, race
and sexuality, often through social media. "These are the consumers
that are really pushing brands to make a difference and to change,
and honestly, they expect it," said Michelle Lynn Childs, professor
of retail consumer sciences at the University of Tennessee. Ms.
Lynn Childs noted that taking a stand is a "calculated risk" for
brands -- they might alienate one consumer base, but "build brand
loyalty" with another, ideally larger, one.
A prime example played out in 2018 when Nike launched an ad
campaign that featured former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick,
whose "take a knee" protest against police brutality and inequality
ignited a nationwide debate. Despite significant outcry from some
consumers -- and more than a few torched sneakers -- the campaign
was a declaration that the "stick to sports" mentality of an older
generation was obsolete. Notably, just over a week after its debut,
Nike's stock price hit an all-time high.
Even before George Floyd's death, 2020 was already brimming with
advertising connected to national crises. In light of the
coronavirus, brands like Dodge, Target and State Farm all ran ads
featuring actors from across age and racial lines and highlighting
the unifying spirit of Americans, not a given company's
products.
But these relatively schmaltzy ads have been eclipsed by openly
activist statements, which came to a head over this past week, as
every brand from Thom Browne to Warby Parker posted its support for
racial equality on Instagram. Ludovica Cesareo, assistant professor
of marketing at Lehigh University argues that these posts are
filling "a void of leadership." In her opinion, many political
leaders are sending "mixed and confusing messages," and, in that
absence of clarity, consumers are looking to brands for "some kind
of inspiration," and are likely to hold "the brands accountable for
what [political leaders] used to be held accountable for which is
political direction...." Nike's message was praised by some on
social media and disparaged by others -- mirroring the way the
public responds to political leaders.
Companies both large and small have faced criticism that their
communication is falling short. After Need Supply, a clothing and
lifestyle retailer based in Richmond, Va., posted an anodyne
statement to Instagram, reading in part, "We don't know exactly
what we have to add to the conversation," it received a stream of
comments calling the post inadequate. Asked about the public's
response, a representative for Need Supply said the store would now
be donating funds to the Richmond Community Bail Fund and the
NAACP, and that on Tuesday it would be placing its stores and
online operations on pause.
On Twitter, Nike and Adidas faced criticism for not backing up
their statements with financial contributions or concrete
anti-racism actions. Asked for a response to the criticisms, a Nike
spokesperson said, "Nike has a long history of standing against
bigotry, hatred and inequality in all forms. We hope that by
sharing this film we can serve as a catalyst to inspire action
against a deep issue in our society and encourage people to help
shape a better future." Adidas had no comment on the response to
its retweet of Nike's video.
Even black-led brands are not safe from the social-media
backlash: Virgil Abloh, the founder of Off-White and the men's
artistic director at Louis Vuitton is one of the few black
creatives at the helm of a European luxury label. On Monday
morning, Mr. Abloh was criticized across social media for posting
an Instagram photo of his $50 donation to a Florida bail fund, a
figure that many followers viewed as insufficient. Mr. Alboh had no
comment on the response to his post, but in a follow-up Instagram
post he said he donated $20,500 to bail funds and other causes and
he will "continue to donate more and will continue to use my voice
to urge my peers to do the same."
In recent years, some fashion brands have financially supported
social causes in major ways. Following the fire that
catastrophically damaged the Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris in 2019,
luxury conglomerates LVMH and Kering pledged hundreds of millions
of euros toward its restoration. And over the past few months,
scads of brands including Ralph Lauren, Estee Lauder and Tiffany
& Co. committed a million dollars or more each or more to fight
the coronavirus epidemic.
In the past week, Glossier, a millennial favorite skincare
company, spread a donation of $500,000 across a variety of
organizations. Ganni, a Scandinavian brand with a firm foothold in
America, declared its founder's intention to donate $100,000 to
organizations like the ACLU and the NAACP, and Patagonia posted on
Instagram that it was pledging the same amount to the NAACP Legal
Defense Fund. On a smaller scale, Judy Turner, an upstart New York
sweater brand, declared that it would contribute 15% of its sales
in June to fund black-American-owned businesses, and Aurora James,
the founder of shoe brand Brother Vellies, swiftly started the " 15
Percent Pledge," an initiative calling for major retailers to
dedicate 15% of their shelf space to products from black-owned
businesses (mirroring the approximately 15% of Americans who are
black.)
The takeaway? If a brand wants to take a stand, it might take
more than words to convince an audience that it really cares.
"Consumers are done with platitudes and empty statements," said
Lehigh University's Ms. Cesareo. "They want material action."
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
June 02, 2020 16:42 ET (20:42 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.