H&M sh*t storm

[lifted*fox]

you wouldn't chance it on purpose and that's the point.

 

but are we going to spend the rest of forever pulling photos of black people wearing clothes with monkeys on them out of catalogues?

 

that kid will be wearing a shit ton of other clothes on the same website probably. he would have had a pile to put on and be photographed in.

 

MAYBE just maybe if it was a targeted TV advert someone would have looked at it and gone 'mmm, maybe not, just in case' - but if it's a website photo I doubt it's been subjected to the same scrutiny. 

 

it's just a kid wearing a top to 90% of people.

[lifted*fox]

 

same kid, different top.

 

obviously modelled multiple clothes on the same day and absolutely nobody thought it was a problem.

 

****ing ridiculous that it's even a thing and I'm sure everyone at H&M feels exactly the same. 

[lifted*fox]

in fact, 90% of their clothes on their website have multiple variations.

 

one colourway / style will show a white kid wearing it and another colourway / style will show a black / asian kid wearing it. 

 

the website is about as ****ing inclusive as you can get. 

 

the people 'outraged' by this are clearly thick as ****ing shit and unable to look at it in the context of the entire website. 

[Guest]

36 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

 

I love a good conspiracy but I think purposely putting a young black boy in a sweater with a monkey slogan on it to provoke racism outrage as a marketing method is still a stretch too far.

 

I know several people who work in marketing and whilst something like this might work for a small brand trying to get noticed it's too much of a risk for a big brand like H&M.

 

There is absolutely no way a group of marketers sat around the table at H&M HQ and suggested to do that on purpose. If it ever got out they'd be in big trouble. 

A lot of companies will deliberately do things that are legally questionable (or blatantly illegal); quite a few would have no issue taking a gamble on something that is morally questionable, especially if it's hard to pin them down with real evidence, such as in this case. 

 

Take the example of VW, one of the world's largest and most stable companies; executive decisions were made for a scheme that was legally, morally and environmentally reprehensible. I don't know what sort of company H&M is - but they work in the industry of fast fashion. An industry built on what is essentially modern slave labour(plenty of interesting reports on how they work around this issue), and the ability to exploit the vanity of the youth generation for massive profits. 

 

Are they morally dubious enough to do a stunt like this? Possibly. Are they intelligent and cunning enough to? Definitely.

[lifted*fox]

Just now, winchesterton said:

Are they morally dubious enough to do a stunt like this? Possibly. Are they intelligent and cunning enough to? Definitely.

 

http://www2.hm.com/en_gb/kids/shop-by-product/boys-8-14-years/jumpers-and-cardigans.html?product-type=kids_boys14y_jumperscardigans&sort=stock&offset=0&page-size=120

 

look at the website and how every piece of clothing has a white model and then a black model / asian model variant and then ask yourself if it's even an issue. 

 

it's ONE photo in a collection of HUNDREDS all doing the same thing. 

 

he just happened to be in a single sweatshirt that had the word monkey on it. 

 

it's an absolute non-entity. clearly not intended in any way, shape or form. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

 

http://www2.hm.com/en_gb/kids/shop-by-product/boys-8-14-years/jumpers-and-cardigans.html?product-type=kids_boys14y_jumperscardigans&sort=stock&offset=0&page-size=120

 

look at the website and how every piece of clothing has a white model and then a black model / asian model variant and then ask yourself if it's even an issue. 

 

it's ONE photo in a collection of HUNDREDS all doing the same thing. 

 

he just happened to be in a single sweatshirt that had the word monkey on it. 

 

it's an absolute non-entity. clearly not intended in any way, shape or form. 

No, I don't think it's racist, and 90% of the population wouldn't think it's racist. (I would however, spot the unfortunate irony in it immediately.)  And that is sort of the entire point. The vocal 10% kicks up a storm, then the other 90% become an audience to it. It's not bad enough to make you think they are knuckle dragging white supremacists. So this safely falls into the classic category of "no such thing as bad publicity". The risk is relatively minimal. H&M get's a bit of publicity, some sympathy from the majority of the public (everyone hates being called a racist), and it works as a healthy counterbalance to any direct promotion of their virtues (adverts based on equality, green credentials etc) - to avoid sounding too pretentious. A person/brand needs to at least hint at a bit of edginess or flaws of some sort.

 

It's not a conspiracy theory, as these are methods used at least since the 1950s by musicians and actors to great effect. Can I say with absolute certainty that H&M did it this way? no. But it's no great stretch of the imagination either. They wouldn't be the first and they won't be the last.

[lifted*fox]

you're just missing the point now and so will 90% of other people who come across this story.

 

doing 2 minutes of research to visit their site and see the context it exists in completely quashes any questionable intent whatsoever.

 

but half the idiots who just see the headline and the photo on it's own will assume that either H&M have either been racist or tried to be clever - of which they have done neither.

 

Edited 10 January 2018 by lifted*fox

[Strokes]

49 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Every photo in that catalogue would be poured over by a photo editor. Even if you don't think it's racist you know someone will. Why would you chance it?

I wouldn’t chance it and that’s why I don’t think they did, I just don’t see what they gain for the risk. I’m surprised nobody noticed but that is what I’m prepared to believe happened, maybe I’m naive, maybe you’re  cynical but it’s done that kids portfolio no harm. 

Edited 10 January 2018 by Strokes

[Buce]

44 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Every photo in that catalogue would be poured over by a photo editor. Even if you don't think it's racist you know someone will. Why would you chance it?

 

I think you're over-thinking it, Webbo.

 

I can honestly say it would have passed me by if attention hadn't been drawn to it. As an experiment,  I showed it to my missus and daughter (without explaining why), neither of whom were aware of the media storm, and neither of them saw anything to make them comment. They only saw the possible racist connotation once I'd pointed it out to them.

[Strokes]

35 minutes ago, lifted*fox said:

 

same kid, different top.

 

obviously modelled multiple clothes on the same day and absolutely nobody thought it was a problem.

 

****ing ridiculous that it's even a thing and I'm sure everyone at H&M feels exactly the same. 

That kid is cool as fùck, he owns them clothes.

[m4DD0gg]

Called marketing. 

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, m4DD0gg said:

Called marketing. 

Or another possibility being a friendly workplace bet. 

 

"A tenner says you can't get this photo through final edit and published"

 

"Make it twenty and i'll get that rather suggestive adolescent slogan shirt through production too"

[Arkie Bennett]

1 hour ago, Webbo said:

Every photo in that catalogue would be poured over by a photo editor. Even if you don't think it's racist you know someone will. Why would you chance it?

I hope you mean pored over. I used to pour over the Kays catalogue lingerie section in my adolescence.

[Webbo]

Just now, Arkie Bennett said:

I hope you mean pored over. I used to pour over the Kays catalogue lingerie section in my adolescence.

So did I, at the same time as I was pawing something else.

[m4DD0gg]

42 minutes ago, winchesterton said:

Or another possibility being a friendly workplace bet. 

 

"A tenner says you can't get this photo through final edit and published"

 

"Make it twenty and i'll get that rather suggestive adolescent slogan shirt through production too"

Nah my money is on marketing. Think about if it's being discussed on a football forum it will be all over mum's net and people will pop in to see what it's all about. 

[yorkie1999]

3 hours ago, Webbo said:

Is there a single person on here who has seen that ad and can genuinely say they didn't think it was a bit iffy? If we can see that how can't highly paid advertising executives? It's not credible.

Honestly, If i was browsing through their catalogue and saw it, i wouldn't have even noticed what the writing said.  When i first saw it,  it wasn't until i caught the racist  bit that i started to read it properly.

[GaelicFox]

20 hours ago, lcfc sheff said:

Not sure if this has already been posted somewhere else, if so I apologise. 

 

I'd like to know what peoples opinion is on the h&m disaster that's been sweeping the internet the last fews day; was it intentional racism or just people always seeing the worst in things?

Load of crap mate this story 

 

It’s been a deliberate move to get idiots like us talking about H&M

 

 

Edited 11 January 2018 by GaelicFox

[Bellend Sebastian]

14 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Je suis Madonna?

She doesn't pay for them, she just bundles them into a sack

[Bellend Sebastian]

14 hours ago, Webbo said:

 When those kids are going to Greggs every Sunday to pray then we've got a problem.

They will grow up strong and ruddy cheeked as a result of their fortifying pastry/processed meat diet. As ruddy cheeked as black children can be, anyway

[Vlad the Fox]

It may well have been a successful attempt to promote discussion, but it may have also been a case of treating it like any other item of clothing that they sell in their catalogue. If as mentioned above, they show all the child models of different ethnicity in all their clothing then the decision was probably taken that to treat this garment any differently would have shown a negative response by saying to the black kid, 'you aren't modelling this one mate', 'why', 'because you're black'.

 

I think they would have been fully aware of the possible reaction but took the correct decision that to not include it would have been a more negative move and against the ethos of the catalogue/company. 

[ajthefox]

52 minutes ago, Vlad the Fox said:

It may well have been a successful attempt to promote discussion, but it may have also been a case of treating it like any other item of clothing that they sell in their catalogue. If as mentioned above, they show all the child models of different ethnicity in all their clothing then the decision was probably taken that to treat this garment any differently would have shown a negative response by saying to the black kid, 'you aren't modelling this one mate', 'why', 'because you're black'.

 

I think they would have been fully aware of the possible reaction but took the correct decision that to not include it would have been a more negative move and against the ethos of the catalogue/company. 

Spot on is this.

 

You can bet if they'd not put this kid in this hoodie some sad sap would've noticed and complained and in that case it would definitely have been a more negative reaction.

[Babylon]

15 hours ago, m4DD0gg said:

Called marketing. 

Actually it's called Guerrilla marketing, but that would probably get taken badly as well.

[GaelicFox]

4 hours ago, Babylon said:

Actually it's called Guerrilla marketing, but that would probably get taken badly as well.

Paddy power are excellent at it 

[Countryfox]

19 hours ago, Arkie Bennett said:

I hope you mean pored over. I used to pour over the Kays catalogue lingerie section in my adolescence.

 

19 hours ago, Webbo said:

So did I, at the same time as I was pawing something else.

 

Who moderates the bloody moderators that’s what I want to know ! ...    disgusting !! 

[urban.spaceman]

The mother's played a blinder here. She's managed to get her son more exposure as a model than she could have dreamed of when signing for H&M. He'll now get more offers for work and she'll probably get interviews about why everyone getting their knickers in a twist are a bunch of race baiting morons. She a KNEW there'd be some idiot getting outraged over it. THEN >>>>>>> PROFIT. 

 

She's a genius. I think I love her.