ADVERTISEMENT A new ad campaign featuring Euphoria and White Lotus star Sydney Sweeney has sparked fierce backlash over racial undertones, leading some to label it as “tone-deaf” and even “Nazi”.
Another case of Godwin’s law – which states that any online discussion that goes on for long enough will increase the probability of a comparison involving Nazis? Or is this ad so poorly fashioned that critics have a point?
Let’s start – as logic dictates – at the beginning.
The popular American actress appears in a campaign for American Eagle, designed to celebrate American style.
In it, the 27-year-old sports a pair of jeans, flaunts her curves and tells viewers: “I’m not here to tell you to buy American Eagle jeans… And I definitely won’t say they’re the most comfortable jeans I’ve ever worn, or that they make your butt look amazing.”
Then, the slogan “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans” pops up on the screen.
Fair enough, as they do look comfy.
However, the actress then says: “See what I did there, right?” – highlighting the “jeans” / “genes” double entendre.
This was taken a step further in a follow-up video posted to American Eagle’s Instagram, which shows Sweeney approaching a billboard with the phrase “great genes” and striking out the word “genes” and replacing it with “jeans.”
In another spot, Sweeney says: “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair colour, personality, and even eye colour… My jeans are blue.” This is followed by a voiceover that states: “Sydney Sweeney has great Jeans.”
Clever wordplay for some; significantly more problematic for others.
Indeed, critics have accused the ad of peddling “Nazi” propaganda, pointing out that the play on words with “great genes” has racist connotations and veers towards white supremacist ideals. Many have also highlighted that considering Sweeney is blue-eyed and blonde-haired, it echoes eugenic messaging.
Cue: a heated and viral culture debate between those who think the controversy is overblown by the “woke brigade” and those who believe that this is not only a reminder of the fashion world’s long history of celebrating white privilege, but an unintentional mirroring of fascist ideas. Then there are also those who are convinced that the phrasing of the ad was by design, and that American Eagle was looking to kick the hornet’s nest when it comes to issues of race and nationalism.
Check out some of the reactions below:
“I didn’t know what everyone was freaking out about with that Sydney Sweeney ad but then I realised I should watch it with the sound on and OH MY GOD. Yeah that’s some f*cked Aryan eugenics shit.”
“So Sydney (& American Eagle) somehow expect audiences to not interpret this visual as a euphemism for eugenics and white supremacy?”
“Maybe I’m too f*cking woke,” another added. “But getting a blue eyed, blonde, white women and focusing your campaign around her having perfect genetics feels weird, especially considering the current state of America.”
“I hate the Sydney Sweeney jeans ad, it’s like why are we promoting eugenics with the state of this country rn, NO I don’t want your genes actually. F*ck you American Eagle.”
To make matters knottier, the campaign also purports to raise awareness of domestic violence with a line designed by Sweeney called The Sydney Jean – with the full purchase price going to the Crisis Text Line, which offers mental health support. Many online have labelled this “completely tone-deaf.”
As of writing, the actress has not released a statement regarding the backlash. Neither has American Eagle.
How damaging is this to both Sweeney and the company?
It’s up for debate. As recently evidenced by Coldplaygate, not all controversy can be hurtful to a brand… However, that was properly handled. In this case, the company’s silence has rubbed people up the wrong way and intensified calls for the campaign to be pulled.
Sayantani DasGupta, a professor of Narrative Medicine, has even analysed the ads in a viral TikTok post, showing how the American Eagle campaign is “imbued with eugenic messaging”, which has seen the “forced sterilization and decrease of reproduction among undesirable communities” in the American South.
The professor concluded the American Eagle advert is “contributing to and reinforcing this kind of anti-immigrant, anti-people of colour, pro-eugenic, political moment.”
So, what do you think?
An innocent mistake? A fascistic campaign? Or a shameless attempt to rile people up to give the brand some publicity?
If it’s the latter, the viral spots worked. They propelled the company’s stock by a reported 15 per cent, representing an estimated $310 million boost to its market valuation since their release.
It would seem that courting controversy – no matter how crass – does wonders for your stock, financially speaking. However, when it comes to the court of public opinion and reputational risks, it’s a more dangerous gamble.
