Urban Outfitters is in the headlines again for a fashion faux pas. The retailer targeting young consumers has come under fire for selling a faded, vintage style Kent University sweatshirt. But amidst the bleach splotches and holes was a splotch of red dye, leading consumers to believe the style call was meant to be reminiscent of the Kent State University massacre.
After the image of the sweatshirt went viral and consumers shared their outrage, Urban Outfitters issued an apology. But was it enough? The RTP staff weighs in:
Debbie Hauss, Editor-in-Chief: Once could be considered an honest mistake, but this company has become notorious for selling inappropriate items. And because negative publicity tends to help the brand, I hesitate to continue the conversation…
Advertisement
Alicia Fiorletta, Senior Editor: Urban Outfitters has developed quite a reputation over the past few years and it seems, like American Apparel, it isn’t just a series of honest mistakes. Rather, the folks at Urban Outfitters seem to think all press is good press. While that used to work, I’m not sure it will hold true this time. Given recent violent events (specifically, several shootings nationwide), the public is increasing awareness on violence and gun control. And with the history of the Kent State massacre, I think the connection is too strong for consumers to bear.
Kim Zimmermann, Managing Editor: Some mistakes are a result of stupidity and/or laziness, and some are intentional. This seems to fall into the “intentional” category. On the other hand, DiGiorno using #WhyIStayed – a hashtag for victims of domestic violence to tell their stories – to promote pizza seems to fall into the stupid/lazy category and the company seems truly contrite when the error was pointed out.
Rob Fee, Managing Editor: I don’t think Urban Outfitters offered much of an apology at all. Saying, “we deeply regret that this item was perceived negatively,” is simply another way of saying it’s not sorry for what it did, it’s sorry for how the public reacted. Whether or not it was an unintentional discoloration, there was a complete absence of quality control. Given its its history of gaffes, I find it hard to believe this was unintentional, but I suppose I should expect no less from a retailer who once offered a T-shirt with an Obama/black color option. This should blow over for Urban Outfitters though. It has offended us before with minimal effect to its bottom line. It will, in all likelihood, offend us again.
Glenn Taylor, Associate Editor: I’ll be honest, the shirt did bring the brand to the front of my mind when I otherwise would have never thought about it, so I guess the company has that going for them. The apology has all the sincerity of a Roger Goodell press conference, and I think this a case of trying too hard to position the company as an “alternative” brand (see American Apparel). It was a tasteless attempt at humor, and combining this with the prior litany of controversies shows that the corporate culture really hasn’t progressed. I think less people will be inclined to purchase UO clothing and if the company stays on that track without some change, it will continue to see declining sales numbers.
Brian Anderson, Associate Editor: When it comes to the apology, there was nothing Urban Outfitters could say or do to aleave the situation. However, they managed to rub salt in the wounds by making the excuse that it was “discoloration from the original shade of the shirt.” Ultimately, you can make the argument that any publicity is good publicity, but that seems to be the case only for smaller brands – according to research highlighted in thisNew York Times article. Since Urban Outfitters has had several marketing ploys lead to consumer outcry, this will impact them much more negatively than past incidents.
What do you think about this incident? Will the Urban Outfitters brand recover? Share your thoughts in the comments section below!
