The latest issue of Clamor Magazine hits newsstands September 1, and features extensive coverage of American Apparel's "co-opting of progressive values to hype an otherwise less-than progressive workplace." It features parody ads like the one above, which reads:
Kristina, born to an Iranian mom and Belgian pop, is a native Ohioan. She’s seen here sporting an emerald 100% cotton racerback tank. Unfortunately, her brand devotion to AA could never land her a spot in their ads: Dov Charney thinks short hair on girls is “unnatural.�
Indeed, Kristina would never make the cut at AA. Female employees/models must be fully waxed and stripped down to their tube socks. Sure, the company's sexed-up ads feature half-naked and provocatively posed men, too. But the female ads are far more condescending. Compare these two ads, both selling AA's "Summer Shirt":
Meet Melissa. She won an unofficial wet T-shirt contest held at the American Apparel apartment in Montreal. Her prize for winning was a travel mug from McGill University, and the satisfaction of a job well done. Melissa is wearing our new ultralight Sheer Jersey T-Shirt, AKA "The Summer Shirt," available at our stores and online.
And the male version?
Meet Memo. He's a 31-year-old creative director living in Mexico City (where this polaroid was taken). Memo is wearing our Summer Shirt with bootleg Playboy Bunny briefs from a street market down there.
Yeah. As John Straub writes in Clamor, "The company possesses a downtown textile factory straight out of the ’40s, a sexploitation ad campaign from the ’70s, and a marketing strategy so sophisticated it almost seems to come from the future. Old-world manufacturing paternalism meets sexy transnational marketing: has American Apparel vertically integrated different eras of capitalism?"
Charney & Co. are less than pleased with Clamor's coverage, and are threatening the tiny indie magazine with legal action. I think this means the folks at Clamor have struck a nerve and are doing something right. Props to the editors/writers for pointing out that AA's non-sweatshop stance doesn't make up for its proto-porn advertising campaigns or the fact that Charney reportedly thinks sexual harassment is OK as long as you're a hipster.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Meet Paternalism..
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/3828
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
It's funny, but the only thing I can think of when I compare the Melissa and Memo shots is how badly out of focus the male photo is.
Eh, whatevs. There are plenty of retards who get all mooney over girls with long hair...at least he's up front about his retardedness (as opposed to the ones who don't admit it). As long as he keeps making affordable, comfortable clothing that's easy to deal with, I don't give a shit about his grooming preferences.
I sometimes like to think of dudes as pieces of (tasty) meat, so it would be hypocritical for me to say otherwise.
Jane, you should check out the link about sexual harassment. Also, in an episode that Joe Francis apparently took a page from, Charney masturbated in front of the dumbstruck reporter doing a fluff piece on him for Jane magazine. He's more kinds of creepy than one.
The article makes some interesting points about the unionization issue, I'd like to add one. If the workers are being paid a decent, living wage and they have access to reasonable health insurance they are way ahead of a lot of employees in the manufacturing business. As a former union organizer, I can assure you that union environments are just as "paternalistic" as progressive non-union shops. A union is just as hierarchical and male dominated as any given corporation. If your goal is a decent wage and health benefits and you can get those without a union, then you've saved yourself from dealing with yet another organization that is more interested in itself than you as a worker.
The sexual harrassment is a separate issue entirely and I would really question the ability of a union to put a stop to it. Sounds like Mr. Charney is your typical sleazeball in that arena.
By the way, can someone refresh my memory--didn't either Ben or Jerry (of ice cream fame) have an initial stake in American Apparel?
As I understand from my research, it was Ben Cohen who was the original investor in SweatX, the sweat-free brand that has since tanked, but was responsible for initially pushing Charney to play this angle with AA. Interestingly, according to Adam Neiman of No Sweat Apparel, Ben, who was on the board of Hot Fudge Venture Fund at the time (a foundation designed to fund positive capitalistic ventures) snatched the sweat-free idea from a proposal the Venture Fund received, a proposal written by Neiman himself, according to him.
On another note, if you look at only a certain subset of workplace characteristics, indeed, AA does very well, but the whole picture seems quite different, and the pervasive sexual atmosphere and inappropriate expectations of employees' openness to Charney's free-ranging sexual interests, I think, isn't just one aspect of one's work envirnment. It's kind of like having a nice stew and adding a quart of Draino to it.
I don't find it unusual that Mr. Charney is considering legal action against a tiny magazine, considering that lasst I heard someone making fun of him, it was a webcomic (www.wigu.com/overcompensating) complaining about shipping problems from AA, and making a joke about Charney's 70's porno greasy vibe. And! AA contacted Jeff Rowland demanding that he remove it. A webcomic. If he's that defensive, you can be sure that deep down, they know they're doing something sorta wrong.
Thanks for postng this, Ann. Great read.
and might I add that, if they were truly going for the hipsters, that parody ad would be much, much more effective than their actual ads
If you browse the rest of their "provocative" ads, click on the one targeting Japanese consumers.
Holy pornography, batman.
heads up:
After nearly 6 months of work and hundreds of hours of interviews and research, Knowmore.org is releasing its special report on American Apparel, LLC.
When Knowmore's American Apparel entry came to the attention of CEO Dov Charney, he called to challenge our representation of his company, and demanded we take a closer look. He also offered us unprecedented access to his factory, workers, and management, which we accepted and engaged.
The result is this report; which represents the most complete Knowmore.org entry to date, and the most comprehensive look at Charney's controversial company ever published.
If that report from knowmore.org is a closer look at the company, then they can't see the forest from the trees. Anyone who actually bothers to sit down and read the entire thing will notice that it conveniently glosses over quotes and fact that come out to Charney's credit, while showering anything against him in analysis and interpretation. It might have been compiled objectively, but it's definitely not fair and balanced, and other blogs that actually know the industry are starting to call them on it.
Bourbs:
Do you have a link to anything that actually includes analysis? Your link appears to have gone to a single blog (yours?), with no others obviously supporting it, written in a rather random style (with links to just about everywhere else other than places with supporting evidence), and lacking any sort of useful rebuttal at all.
I'm perfectly happy to look at evidence that American Apparel is getting a bad rap and that the Knowmore report is erroneous, but it actually has to be evidence. One guy making vague accusations isn't helpful.
This bourbs guy is doing his best to get some burn off our report, and sent me an email with the same kind of language he posted here. I sent him one back telling him I have no idea what he (or his vague blog) are talking about, but would be happy to engage some concrete criticism of our report.
However, it's worth noting that American Apparel itself is a far more happy with my report than Bourbs is:
After we published the report, I gave American Apparel's press agent Cynthia Semon (who I'd been working with extensively to get AA's side this whole time) the article... here's her response:
--------
HI Bernard,
Just tried to call, but got your voicemail and thought it would be much better to send you an e-mail. No problem, I completely understand and respect the need to meet your deadline. We can revisit any loose ends at a later date that would be suitable to you.
I really want to thank you for doing such a thorough report, which I know took a tremendous amount of time and effort for you to complete. I truly appreciate the ethical journalism you maintained and the seriousness of your report that you managed to keep balanced. Also, thank you for changing the "red" rating to clarify Knowmore position, which I respect.
On a personal note with Mr. Fink, I am disappointed to see Mr. Fink is dispensing selective information/depositions instead of adhering to our judicial process to present all discovery/evidence from both sides to a judge or jury to adjudicate.
The responses seems fair and intelligent too. As you know, it is hard to fully comprehend the different layers that American Apparel represents, but you did a standup job in conveying the various nuances.
Very best,
Cynthia