Zara scandal - Fashion chain Zara stops campaign: Covered statues and a central accusation
The model stands in leather clothes in front of a wooden box, surrounded by stone rubble and crumbling debris. You could mistake the setting for a studio, perhaps even see it as the storage area of a museum with antique statues. But the woman is carrying a figure on her shoulder, wrapped in a white cloth. An image that has been seen frequently in recent weeks. Not in the Zara fashion campaign, however, but on the battlefields in Gaza. The advertisement, which has been on the Spanish chain's website since Monday, caused a shitstorm in the Muslim world. Many saw the staging of the shrouded statues as Palestinian shrouds and accused the fashion brand of having political intentions. On social media, they called for a boycott of the company.
Zara only removed the images from its online store on Tuesday morning. The company apologized on Instagram: The campaign had already been photographed in September, it wrote. In other words, a month before the war between Israel and Hamas began. According to Zara, it regrets having offended customers with the images. The impressions were far removed from what they had wanted to convey. The company is sorry for the misunderstanding that arose. However, there was no talk of the campaign being a mistake. Within two hours, over 25,000 people had commented on the apology on Instagram. Many reacted indignantly.
Insults and false symbolism
In fact, this is not the first time that the brand has made headlines with discrimination and inappropriate symbolism. In 2007, Zara removed a handbag from its range that was adorned with a swastika. At the time, it was said that it came from an external supplier and that they did not know what was on the bag. Another case occurred in 2014 when a striped shirt for children was offered that featured a yellow star: it was reminiscent of the Star of David, the top of the uniform of Jewish concentration camp prisoners.
Other brands also received a shitstorm for fashion with racist motifs. Such as H&M in 2018, when pictures of a young black boy wearing a sweater with the slogan "Coolest monkey in the jungle" appeared in the online store. In an interview with stern magazine, Karl-Johan Persson, CEO of the Swedish fashion chain at the time, said: "That was a mistake. There was no intention behind it."
Perversion instead of provocation
A similar argument was made at Balenciaga in December 2022 after the luxury brand published a Christmas campaign with teddy bears and leather harnesses that was reminiscent of sadomasochistic practices. The fact that toys of all things were used for this caused worldwide horror. Provoking with fetishes in the nursery? That was too much even for reality star Kim Kardashian, who was closely associated with the house and designer Demna Gvasalia. Balenciaga wanted to generate as much attention as possible with a scandalous production - and ended up damaging its image.
These are examples that should actually hang like a memorial in every design studio. After all, large companies have their own teams that only deal with trademark rights and politically correct design. So far, no one at Zara has been available to make a statement. It is quite likely that the brand, like H&M and Balenciaga at the time, did not really want to offend or comment, but acted out of ignorance without having given it much thought. You can see from the reactions online that fashion brands can no longer afford to be so thoughtless today.
Read also:
- Unanimous decision: faster wolf culls possible
- No Christmas peace with the British royals
- No Christmas peace with the British royals
- No Christmas peace with the royals
The controversy surrounding Zara's fashion campaign echoes past mistakes made by other major fashion brands. In 2007, H&M removed a handbag with a swastika from its line, claiming ignorance about the symbol's significance. Similarly, in 2014, H&M faced backlash for selling a children's shirt with a yellow star, resembling the Star of David.
The CEO of H&M at the time, Karl-Johan Persson, acknowledged the mistake and apologized, stating there was no intention behind it. This pattern of insensitive or racially offensive fashion releases is not limited to H&M. In 2018, Balenciaga came under fire for a Christmas campaign featuring teddy bears and leather harnesses, which many found reminiscent of sadomasochistic practices.
These incidents highlight the need for fashion brands to be more mindful of cultural sensitivities and the potential impact of their designs. Despite the apologies and claims of ignorance, these missteps have significant consequences for the brands' reputations.
In light of these past blunders, the recent Zara scandal raises questions about whether the fashion industry needs to improve its diligence in avoiding controversial themes or symbols in its campaigns.
Source: www.stern.de
