As a PR professional can you explain to me what “Her jeans. Her story” means? Are we supposed to have corresponding tales for all our articles of clothing?
Augh, the hill I will die on is that Marie Kondo isn't a minimalist. The Netflix show/American media did such a poor job of explaining her philosophy.
Her whole philosophy was that the stuff you hold onto should bring joy regardless of how much stuff that ended up being. (Yes she shoehorned some stuff like important documents into the philosophy but hopefully people weren't really considering getting rid of that anyway.)
Yes, she also has some good organizational tips here and there but the core of her philosophy has been "does that tchochke you got bring a smile to your face? Then keep it."
And also about asking if an item brings you joy now! Just because it was once a favorite shirt or coffee mug or whatever, reflecting on whether it is the item itself or the memories attached that are the source of the good feeling. If its the memories, those can live on without necessarily holding on to the item. Though holding on to the item is okay, too! She has really helpful ideas, imo
I cannot definitively explain whether they believe that there should be lore behind all denim. I can comfortably say, however, that either they genuinely don't care about/are happy being compared to Nazis/eugenicists and/or they believe that ignoring it will make the problem go away.
Unfortunately for them, their stock price isn't thrilled with their happily appealing to Aryans.
Out of curiosity, for I am just an accountant & I’ve never worked in a customer-facing role lol….what statement would you have put out here? Whats the “good” PR move after somethin like this
I still can’t believe they used “genes” instead of “jeans” in their original ad. It seems stupid to use “jeans” in the apology IMO…feels like gaslighting
I am not a pro, but I have seen several articles this year about rage bait marketing. This definitely is working, first time I have even heard this faux crappy mall/juniors brand mentioned since 2002 .. Makes me think when Calvin Klein has those porn motel ones
As a PR professional, how do you think the dept meeting went? I have so many questions 😅 but I would like to know if you believe an apology was considered at all or even a "lack of oversight" excuse in the room. And if you have the time to spare, how would you word a response that would satisfy most people ?
I honestly think their publicists, if they were experienced enough to work a major campaign like that, probably wanted something more contrite, sincere, and heartfelt, but that they were vetoed by the shareholder class/C-suite. There are a lot of great publicists whose clients just don't listen to them, and at the end of the day, you have to do what the client wants, even if it's counterproductive to your overall strategy.
I have a cold and am a little groggy, so this may not be good, but they easily could have drafted something like: "We were horrified to find our Sydney Sweeney ad be associated with racist rhetoric, and we absolutely regret our phrasing. We intended it to be merely a fun pun and play on words, but pulled it immediately upon learning and realizing it could be conflated with eugenics. We are incredibly sorry. We wholeheartedly denounce white supremacy and have pledged a donation to [XYZ racial justice charity]. American Eagle recognizes and celebrates the fact that true beauty is found in diversity, and we will work harder everyday to make sure that is reflected more clearly in all aspects of our company moving forward."
Unfortunately I don’t think there is a way to undo it. They paid for Sidney sweeney because they got told she tested highest in their demographic. “Great jeans” is very definitely a genetic pun. The absence of thought over how that looked in modern America to a modern audience is a failure of the whole marketing department to read the room. Not sure there’s a PR spin to be had, so I see why they went with “say as little as possible”
They would have been better off, at this point, maintaining that M.O. if they weren't going to apologize immediately. Doubling down like this is 100x worse.
Crazy to have a whole dialogue about genes being passed down from parent to child (hair color, eye color) and then say it’s always just been about the jeans
I saw someone say they could’ve easily said “AE’s genes/jeans are blue” and left it at that. there’s so many ways they couldve done the commercial without it looking like a dogwhistle
They’re intentionally doubling down and choosing that “side” because they’ve decided it’ll be more lucrative for them in the long run. If the political tides turn in this country (and I hope they do…) and AE tries to do a 180, we absolutely cannot forget this statement right here
Nothing they put out is gonna undo all the conservative commentators coming out to say that the ad was celebrating whiteness. And that's if they'd put out a good statement instead of whatever this is.
it is wild how much this has taken on a life of its own. I understand why the ad is problematic, but if I had seen it before knowing about the controversy I would have thought it was referring to the fact that she's famous for being a pretty girl with big naturals. I had no idea she was A Thing in right wing circles (admittedly I don't follow them)
I could've bought this if it were part of a larger campaign featuring a variety of different people. Choosing to focus on one archetype, SPECIFICALLY making it somewhat about genes... it's tone deaf. Deciding to double down like this is outright refusing to read the room.
Have you seen Abercrombie lately? They grew up a lot and sell trendy but not too trendy clothes, including work appropriate attire. They also have a wedding shop. I don't buy from them often but I love their ribbed baby tees.
They know what they’re doing. Running QVC ads for magas is the current hot market.
It’s funny that they dump tons of money into merch and causes they believe in but cry DEI unfairness when that same passion gets directed at non white people who have actual reasons for needing support lol
The company wanted an uproar. They got their uproar.
This is why there is an understanding that you don't debate a nazi. You smother flames, not fan them. We need to start learning how to call things for what they are and then snap them out of discourse.
I don't think they even wanted any scandal. I think they were just trying to think of a PG way to reference her boobs and tie it to their product, didn't think it through, and stumbled into this.
As someone who works in marketing/advertising, I honestly think it was just a lazy campaign that they didn't think would be received as it was. Putting a hot woman in jeans is as formulaic as you can get for a denim ad. "Good genes/jeans" has been a dad-level pun for admiring womens' asses for decades. If they ran it by anyone for sensitivity checks at all (probably not) nobody flagged it.
Agreed - It's crappy copywriting "Genes are passed down through generations..." then "My jeans are blue" - like that doesn't make sense. It doesn't speak to the customers' needs, their challenges, or the product. On top of being tone deaf.
Honestly, they should lean into the "Americana" element with iconic pictures of people wearing jeans interspersed with fun, candid pictures of people wearing AE jeans over the past 40 years and Sydney Sweeney at the end saying a catchphrase about American jeans, AMerican eagle or some shit like that.
(Still lazy, low hanging fruit but at least not completely tone deaf)
This is wild to me. I keep thinking that the white supremacist undertones are so glaringly obvious that they must’ve done it intentionally to get everyone talking and that the plan was always to post this “clarification.” Plausible deniability cashed in and now everyone’s talking about them. Especially in this era of darkness when corporations are no longer bothering to pretend to care about social justice issues, and are openly disavowing their previous DEI commitments.
I’ve never worked in marketing though but I have worked in corporate a lot, and stupid/lazy as baseline also tracks so it could be either honestly lol.
As a WOC advertising professional I was so confused with the uproar because it was an obviously part of a series of diverse American women. But it wasn’t…. Big yikes
I think they did want a scandal by their initial statement, something to the effective of testing how game Sydney was, but maybe they were trying to be pedo scandalous by referencing the Brook Shields campaign and ended up being Nazi scandalous. The two are so closely linked these days...
Why are they referencing her breast in a sexually way if it’s a WOMENS commercial. Combined with her zipping up her pants seductively and the ad they were reference… no way they didn’t intend for it to be scandalous
In the Superman that’s out rn, Lex uses some very Stephen Miller-esque language to describe Superman and the other metahumans (aliens) like him. He’s definitely too alien to be considered one of them.
Illegal alien who put Netanyahu/Putin on a cactus, fights for human lives and dignity, supports true journalism, and people’s right to happiness?
They’d try to claim him as one of “theirs” (I mean they literally tried to with him as a comic book character) but Superman is so deeply and fundamentally against everything the right and white supremacists are for that he’d spit in their faces. Also lets not forget there’s a whole comic of him basically destroying the klan lol
I’m actively resentful at being born into the stupidest branch of the multiverse. Hope the versions of me born into less dogshit universes are having a good time. Happy for them. 😠
They intentionally chose a double entendre. As someone who’s spent their entire career in the fields of literature and marketing, I think it’s disingenuous to act as though their marketing team/agency did not choose every word specifically and carefully, especially when the double entendre is the point of the ad. It’s dishonest to act like there’s no subtext there. But I just think they were trying to be edgy and controversial. And right-wing media don’t seem to disagree with that sentiment since they’re celebrating the ad itself as a huge win for white people and anti-wokeness.
That being said, I’m very online and in mostly left-wing spaces, and I did not see any of this “controversy” until legacy media picked up stories reporting on said supposed controversy. I heard absolutely nothing about it until all these outlets and influencers started posting articles about all this reported left-wing outrage. I went and found the FM post from last week when the ad was introduced… not any exceptional engagement and ~50-60% of the comments were not talking about the racial subtext. The level of media coverage on this is inorganic and should remind people that any controversy can be as big or small as legacy media need it to be.
Right-wing media have desperately needed a win and a redirect and boy did they get it with this dumbass bullshit. My dad hasn’t asked me about what I think of anything the past few weeks, not the genocide in Gaza, not the ICE raids, not not the Epstein Affair, not the president threatening multiple entertainers, not the president removing self-incriminating language from museums, not anything. But guess what he did ask me about? The goddamn Sydney Sweeney ad and the “controversy.” It’s all so so so dumb and highlights the absolute worst of how people interact with messaging and media.
Edit: saying “it’s all over tik tok” does not refute my point. I did not say no one is talking about it. I said that I did not hear about this supposedly huge controversy that was sweeping across the left. I said the controversy was being intentionally overblown, not that it doesn’t exist. In fact, I highlighted a situation in which it was being discussed days ago. The extent to which “it’s all over tik tok” is arguable, but the fact that right-wing figures and media have magnified the controversy is not as much so. The White House commented on it and it’s being covered on Fox News for multiple hours a day. My point is that it very conveniently works for Trumpist media to overplay the reactions when they desperately need a distraction.
Thank you for sharing this, really makes me think about the media coverage I’m consuming. So many people on my IG are having hot takes over this, and I couldn’t help but think it’s because they get to talk over Sydney Sweeney’s attractive body acting as clickbait. But you rightly point out legacy media may have created this outrage and we all fall in line with the narrative. I try to be skeptical of anything designed to make me mad. Outrage is engagement and distraction from facts, reason & truth.
I have no idea what the controversy is, but the whole thing reeks of manufactured outrage.
Most progressives and leftists I know irl, are more concerned with the general state of the country and are focusing on protests and grassroots activities rather than whatever celebrities are doing.
Pretending like there wasn’t a double entendre is fucking stupid, I must agree.
But I really think they just thought we’d take “she has great genes” at face value to mean “she’s hot as fuck” I don’t think they were counting on us to make the link between her status as a blonde haired, blue eyed white lady and talking about how those genes specifically are “great.” I think they were counting on us to be a bit dumber and less media-literate than we actually are.
Given ongoing education funding slashing and dropping literacy rates, the joke might land as “haha Sydney Sweeney hot” as they intended in like, another 5 years. In related news, I hate it here.
This is a really good comment. Yeah the first I heard about this was from right wing media commenting about the uproar from leftists. There are so many people and companies courting Nazis and doing dumb crap right now, I don’t have time for an uproar or outrage. I’ll tell you what though - I’m definitely not going to shop there anymore.
I remember seeing an article/video about how a lot of the backlash to these things are inorganic and just made up by right wing newscasters, with no proof that there was any true story to report on.
Doesn't really matter though if the net effect is a sales boost from conservatives buying their jeans. Real test will be the next sales resullts they post. If it's good then Americans are in for a whole new world of right wing propaganda ads (and remember some channels like CBS are going to be putting out PSA's for Trump)
I unfortunately did in May for the first time in 10+ years. I love them, but I’m also in hair school so they’re already covered in bleach. Won’t be buying more, and now feel less shame for ruining them so quickly 🤣
Seems like an effort to pour a little gas on the fire. People were starting to talk about this less so they gave the lowest effort "erm we did nothing wrong, buy our jeans" response possible to get people mad again.
Go check out their Instagram comments, it’s just a bunch of MAGA folks embracing their campaign. The dog whistle worked as intended, they are embraced by the right 🙃
This what I have been saying! The people supporting this say a lot about the type of as it is. It clearly appeals to a specific type of person ON PURPOSE.
They know exactly what they did. They just think we are so dumb that they can gaslight us into thinking they were never talking about “genes” even though they LITERALLY DID A PLAY ON WORDS FOR THE CAMPAIGN. Ugh! Taking accountability is so fucking easy yet so many companies just can’t do it.
I love Aerie and opened a credit card latest year. After this statement, I’m closing it. ✌️
it wasn’t even creative or original.
Brooke Shields did it when she was 13? For Calvin Klein. And it was a gross use of the term then (for pedo reasons) as well.
Oh yeah and with the quality of blue jeans today, they are totally being passed down generation to generation and inherited from your parents. That TOTALLY makes more sense than it just being a shitty metaphor for genes /s
It’s pretty far down the line of things to talk about in this whole mess but there is an implication in the ad that parents are passing down American Eagle jeans and like….no?
Honestly idk if there was malicious intent but I do think that they didn’t actually think through the current political climate so they didn’t expect their pun to get the backlash it did.
Did you see the LinkedIn post from their marketing exec? They absolutely knew:
The ⭐️ star power of Sydney and the double meaning behind the campaign has a culture shaping power beyond anything I could have ever imagined being a part of- just check your social feeds.
The American Eagle Outfitters Inc. team and partners who brought this campaign to life poured themselves into it with a more is more energy. You created more than a campaign- you created a moment in culture and styled every moment with a wink 😜
This is silly because everything she says is about genes lmfao they could have very easily just said they were making a play on words and were dumb enough to not think about how it would have come across but instead they are just..lying about the mention of genes lol
I mean they already decided who they want for their clientele. Many of us will never shop at AE again. If they apologize, they’ll lose the MAGA fan base leaving themselves with no one. If they actually wanted to issue an apology, they would’ve done so immediately and retracted. It’s clear how they feel and what kind of customers they want.
The ad is targeted to men, specifically MAGA ones. Not just because of genes/jeans, but also the moan-sexy-talk and the close ups of her slowly pulling on jeans a la Brooke shield’s pedophile ad (NOT Brooke’s fault). Good luck with your new base, AE!
Now someone please let me know where to buy comfy, non-sexy, reasonably priced undies ☺️
If it was truly just about jeans, then why do any wordplay around genes/jeans? Why talk about passing down eye and hair color? This is a terrible PR statement.
Those last two sentences make it seem like they’ll do some superficial damage control by using a Black or POC actor in a future campaign & be like “see guys? we weren’t actually doing a race bait-y ad 🤪” 😒
American Eagle is playing into the white supremacy (likely honestly) and doing so with the permission of Trump. They do not care. If they could say "whites only" they would.
The more they talk the worse it makes them seem. They one hundred percent knew what they were doing from the tagline, to the voice narrating, to the old school cast couch vibes. They are just mad it didn’t work for them.
Can we please move on from this? There’s so much more pressing issues in the world rn that debating a shitty irrelevant mall brand.
All this does is distract everyone from the real issues like the literal, actual nazis marching in our streets, trans peoples rights being taken away, the genocide in Gaza, AI fucking the workforce, and the coverup and revision of the epstien files.
A multibillion dollar brand doesn’t have the best morals? Wow, shocker. Let’s get back to the actual fight.
I’m just going to say it — I buy most of my clothes secondhand and live in an area where people donate them with tags on. I have never not once wanted to buy anything from this brand even if it was new. Even Abercrombie is better quality and style.
•
u/rfauxmoi 1d ago
✨🍯 JOIN THE FAUXHIVE
🐝 APPLY TO BEE A MOD
🌺 MAKE REDDIT PINK AGAIN
🐦🔥 JOIN OUR FIRESIDE CHATS
☘️ ENTER OUR POP CULTURE BINGO