Score
Converse responds to outrage over the Instagram ad for its Chuck 70 X sneakers
Converse's recent Instagram ad for its Chuck 70 X sneakers faced severe backlash for perceived racial insensitivity, leading to its removal and an apology from the brand. This incident highlights the critical importance of thorough vetting processes in brand strategy to prevent offensive content from reaching the public and damaging brand reputation.
FastCompany: The sneaker company Converse has removed a social media ad that sparked outrage among critics who viewed it as evoking the Ku Klux Klan and lynching. The Instagram ad photo showed K-pop singer Karina wearing a skirt and holding a pair of Chuck 70 X sneakers. Critics lashed out online, saying that a white triangular image created by lighting on the skirt resembled a KKK hood and that the way she held the sneakers made them look like the dangling feet of a lynching victim. Converse, owned by Nike , issued a statement apologizing and saying it removed the ad. “We’re sorry,” said the statement, first released on Friday.
“We understand why this image is deeply upsetting and recognize that we got this wrong. We removed it from our channels and are working to remove it everywhere it appeared. This should not have happened and we will do better.” Converse, based in Boston, declined on Sunday to answer questions seeking additional information, including how the company screens ads before they are posted and how the ad was approved. Karina and her management company, SM Entertainment Group, did not immediately respond to messages through their Instagram accounts.
Retailers and top fashion brands have issued a string of apologies over the years for products criticized as being racially insensitive. Last month, retailer Target pulled a children’s Halloween costume from its shelves after widespread social media backlash, apologizing for selling a garment that critics said evoked racist minstrel caricatures. The Converse photo sparked swift criticism, including calls for staff involved in the ad to be fired and for a boycott of the company. In a slew of comments on social media, posters questioned how the ad could have cleared the company’s advertising vetting process.
Other commenters defended Converse, saying they didn’t believe it was intentional. Lee Merritt, a civil rights attorney based in Texas, posted on Instagram that Converse’s apology “doesn’t undo what got past legal, marketing and leadership at every step.” “We keep having this conversation because corporations keep failing the same test,” he wrote. “Do better means catching this before it airs — not after we’re offended.” Converse, founded in Malden, Massachusetts, in 1908, makes the iconic Chuck Taylor All Star sneaker.
It was first released in 1917 as a non-skid basketball shoe, adding the signature of Taylor — a basketball player who promoted the sneaker — in 1934, according to the company’s website. —Dave Collins, Associated Press
The article discusses a significant incident involving a major brand that underscores the importance of brand strategy and sensitivity, making it highly relevant and impactful for brand professionals, though the themes of backlash and apology are not entirely new.
Weekly digest
Get the Signal digest
Every Monday morning — the top 3 brand trends, 10 high-signal articles, and one emerging signal to watch.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
