From American Eagle to Swatch, brands appear to be making a lot of blunders lately.<\/p>\n
When actress Sydney Sweeney\u2019s jeans campaign came out last month, critics lambasted the wordplay of good \u201cjeans\u201d and \u201cgenes\u201d as tone deaf with nefarious undertones.<\/p>\n
More recently, an advert from Swiss watchmaker Swatch sparked backlash for featuring an Asian model pulling the corners of his eyes, in an offensive gesture.<\/p>\n
Colgate-Palmolive\u2019s ad for Sanex shower gel was banned in the U.K. for problematic suggestions about Black and white skin tones. And consumers derided Cracker Barrel\u2019s decision to ditch its overalls-clad character for a more simplistic text-based logo as \u201csterile,\u201d \u201csoulless,\u201d and \u201cwoke.\u201d<\/p>\n Meanwhile, recent product launches from Adidas and Prada have raised allegations of cultural appropriation.<\/p>\n That has reignited the debate about when an ad campaign is effective and when it\u2019s just plain offensive, as companies confront increased consumer scrutiny.<\/p>\n \u201cEach brand had its own blind spot,\u201d David Brier, brand specialist and author of \u201cBrand intervention\u201d and \u201cRich brand, poor brand\u201d told CNBC via email.<\/p>\n He noted, however, that too many brands are attempting to respond to consumers with an outdated playbook.<\/p>\n \u201cModern brands are trying to navigate cultural complexity with corporate simplicity. They\u2019re using 1950s boardroom thinking to solve 2025 human problems,\u201d he continued.<\/p>\n \u201cThese aren\u2019t sensitivity failures. They\u2019re empathy failures. They viewed culture as something to navigate around rather than understand deeply.\u201d<\/p>\n Some companies have had success in tapping into the zeitgeist \u2014 and, in some cases, seizing on other brands\u2019 shortcomings.<\/p>\n Gap, for instance, this week sought to counter backlash against Sweeney\u2019s advertisement with a campaign in which pop group Katseye lead a diverse group of dancers performing in denim against a white backdrop.<\/p>\n Brier said companies should consider how they can genuinely connect with consumers and be representative, rather than simply trying to avoid offense.<\/p>\n \u201cNo brand can afford to fake understanding. No brand can \u2018committee its way\u2019 to connection. No brand can focus-group its way to authenticity. In 2025, customers can smell the difference from a mile away,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n Nevertheless, ads are meant to spark conversation, and at a time when grabbing and maintaining consumers\u2019 attention \u2014 and share of wallet \u2014 is increasingly difficult, brands have a fine balance to tread.<\/p>\n \u201cBrands live and die by standing out and grabbing attention. On top of that, iconic and culturally relevant brands want to stand for something and be recognized for it. Those are tough asks,\u201d Jonathan A.J. Wilson, professor of brand strategy and culture at Regent\u2019s University London.<\/p>\n In an age of social media and with ever more divided public opinions, landing one universal message can be difficult, Wilson noted. For as long as that remains the case, some brands may still see value in taking a calculated risk.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s hard to land one universal message, and even if you try and tailor your message to various groups, others are watching,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n \u201cControversy grabs attention and puts you at the front of people\u2019s minds. It splits crowds and forces people to have a decision when otherwise they probably wouldn\u2019t care. That can lead to disproportionate publicity, which could be converted into sales.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" From American Eagle to Swatch, brands appear to be making a lot of blunders lately. When actress Sydney Sweeney\u2019s jeans campaign came out last month, critics lambasted the wordplay of good \u201cjeans\u201d and \u201cgenes\u201d as tone deaf with nefarious undertones. More recently, an advert from Swiss watchmaker Swatch sparked backlash for featuring an Asian model…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3191,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3190","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-business"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thetradingdictionary.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3190","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thetradingdictionary.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thetradingdictionary.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thetradingdictionary.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thetradingdictionary.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3190"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/thetradingdictionary.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3190\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thetradingdictionary.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3191"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thetradingdictionary.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3190"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thetradingdictionary.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3190"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thetradingdictionary.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3190"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}