Urban Outfitters has ruffled
feathers yet again, and it is making people wonder is Urban Outfitters deliberately
having bad taste in its marketing campaigns and designs, or is the company just
oblivious?
According to an article by prdaily.com, Urban
Outfitters has posted a vintage Kent State sweatshirt that is a faded red
color, but it has concentrated red ink stains on the front of the sweatshirt
that looks like it is alluding to blood and the 1970 Kent State shootings. There
is also only one made and it was selling for $129.00.
This is the fourth time (that I can think of
at least) Urban Outfitters clothes have been called historically offensive in a major way in
the past few years; Times Magazine wrote an article about past offenses. Urban Outfitters need to step up in communication between its
designers, marketers and PR people because now the company’s reputation seems to be turning to the way of offense and bad taste even though the company has apologized for the offenses.
 |
| This is a still from Urban Outfitters online shopping site displaying the Kent State sweatshirt |
Haley, this was a very good topic to choose. This is one of the most disturbing items that I have seen in a long time. I am in complete aw of Urban Outfitters. I honestly do not know what I would do if I was their PR person. I really hope that they all collaborate soon because Urban Outfitters is in deep trouble.
ReplyDeleteAlex, I would not know what to do either! Especially since this is just one offense in a string of recent major offenses. I thought to myself there are some major gaps in the companies communication system for this to keep happening. There needs to be some sort of system either updated or created to check the clothes designs before the pieces are posted to sell; and especially since the clothes sell for amounts like $129.00!
ReplyDeleteHaley, it’s sad to see that companies are still acting unethically and disgracing our profession. Even worse, Urban Outfitters won’t own up to its mistakes. It is hard for me to understand the motivation behind the decision. I can understand how the company would believe this would temporarily drive sales, but in the long run marketing tactics like this will not help the business survive.
ReplyDeleteMeredith, I did not even think about this as a tactic to drive sales! I just thought it was just bad taste but your thought makes a lot of sense. Maybe they thought any publicity would drive sales because the brand may be seen as forbidden and rebellious even to an extent? On the contrary though, I think it is just in bad taste and bad ethics no matter what the company wants its brand to be labeled as; and I agree with you that this type of marketing won't help in the long run.
ReplyDelete