Purposely Avoiding Values to Gain Attention

Raquel Richards
rr150811@ohio.edu

It seems like in today's society, consumers are only attracted to the extreme. We look for brands that excite us and draw our attention. However, retailers are losing sight at the core values of journalism when choosing to take such extreme measures. While retailers don't fall under the typical role of a journalist, they still play out roles that involve journalism ethics. One of the most recent examples is Urban Outfitters "vintage" one-of-a-kind Kent State sweatshirt.

from urbanoutfitters.com

Minimize Harm

As journalists, one of our core values is to minimize harm. Urban Outfitters did quite the opposite. In their latest attempt to spark interest, Urban Outfitters has been selling items from a sun-faded vintage collection. Their newest item was this Kent State University sweatshirt. Consumers immediately rebelled against the sweatshirt and found it to be repulsive. They believed it to represent a blood stained sweatshirt from the "Kent State Massacre" in 1970. Although Urban Outfitters isn't a journalism firm and sells clothes, they have to understand that they are a brand and what they put out of their brand can be very offensive to someone. Once the news of this sweatshirt went viral, Urban Outfitters made a public apology. However, this apology was very dissatisfying to the public, and definitely not enough for Kent State.

Accountability/Responsibility 

After the public outcry of how disgusted consumers were with the "vintage" sweatshirt, Urban Outfitters public apology was still not enough. Instead of owning up to their mistake and apologizing for any harm they had caused, they rather blamed it on the public for viewing it in that way. They stated, "It was never our intention to allude to the tragic events that took place at Kent State in 1970 and we are extremely saddened that this item was perceived as such." They proceeded to state that the sweatshirt had never been altered and had blotchy colors due from natural wear and fray. Kent State University lashed out at the retailer's decision to sell the sweatshirt. They wrote in an email statement to the Washington Post stating, "We take great offense to a company using our pain for their publicity and profit." Urban Outfitters has done little to cool the fire besides for one apologetic tweet. They are forgetting the role of owning up to their decisions and taking account for their choices. 

We all sit here and wonder, why? How does not one person on the Urban Outfitters marketing or advertising team not see that this could potentially cause harm? Some people want to state that it is just a way to get attention. They have done similar things in the past with a shirt relating to the depression where they got a negative outcome. If their goal is to just draw attention to their brand, it sure is working. 

As consumers and retailers in today's society, we have to decide what is ethical and unethical to draw attention. Urban Outfitters maybe thought that drawing attention to themselves, negative or positive, would help boost sales. But in this case, they made a very unethical decision avoiding core values to draw attention to their brand.