Ignorance and racism – an expensive apology for brands

A lack of diversity in key brand discussions can perpetuate ignorance, which inevitably becomes costly for any brand's reputation.

Following the appalling and offensive online advert displayed by H&M which featured a young black boy modeling a sweatshirt which read; "Coolest monkey in the jungle," a number of racism pundits have attempted to provide an analysis of what may have transpired and how this would affect the H&M brand globally. Of particular interest for me, was H&M’s soft apology through their PR officer, which merely said; “We sincerely apologize for offending people with this image of a printed hooded top. The image has been removed from all online channels and the product will not be for sale in the United States.”

The H&M apology: version 1

Is this a genuine apology? Is it sincere? No. It implies that this is a minor offense and anyone who is offended should simply accept that the brand apologises and will remove the campaign from its platforms. The added benefit, for the offended is that the image has now been removed and the product will not be sold in the US, so just move on. Someone actually said, the apology merely says “I am sorry if you feel badly.”

The H&M apology: version 2

On January 10, 2017, H&M issued another apology. This time a little longer and perhaps thought through, just a bit. “To all customers, staff, media, stakeholders, partners, suppliers, friends and critics. We would like to put on record our position in relation to the image and promotion of a children’s sweater, and the ensuing response and criticism. Our position is simple and unequivocal – we have got this wrong and we are deeply sorry.” You can read the rest of the statement on their website.

Is there a pattern of ignorance and racist remarks?

In November 2015, H&M offered an apology for a seemingly racist response on Twitter following a question as to why their campaign in South Africa was not representative of the population, - more specifically why there were no Black or African models on the advert. Their response was shocking, implying that its use of white models portrayed a more 'positive image' of the brand.

They later issued an apology stating that “we wish apologise if our message caused offense.” The word “if” says a lot.

“Experts” on effects of racism on Blacks in South Africa

Now in South Africa, we have an unlimited supply of political and economic analysts, pundits, experts and so on. But we also have an overflow of ignorant, arrogant and racist “thinkers.”

One such pundit is Jacobus Peenz who responded to a Linkedin article, penned by Hong Kong-based reputation management specialist, Duke Malan, entitled: “2018...a record year for brand trust crises?” For the record, Malan is a South African.

In his response to the article, Peenz writes: “The sensitivities around some issues seem exaggerated. Plain racism is inexcusable, but a blunder is a blunder. They apologized and did everything they should've to amend. Why keep on punishing them? We are busy creating the next social monster with this oversensitive attitude that serves no other purpose but to destroy the good together with the bad. Rather engage and educate than to continuously seek opportunities to punish.” On behalf of millions of Africans around the world who found this offensive, we apologise to Peenz for our collective “oversensitive attitude.”

The second pundit, Greg Norman responded to a separate article that that I had shared penned by Lindsey Bever of the Washington Post. Here’s Norman’s response below:

“I think all the negative hype is an exaggeration of slightness! Racism is not an action but a frame of mind and attitude heightened by historical cruelty. But the more we carry history into the future, the less we evolve into a people of neutrality, mutual respect and mutual consideration void of offense. I have to ask how when and who connected monkeys with my African brothers and sisters? And I must ask why it is that my African brothers and sisters adopted this as a racial mantle? I have spent my life in advertising and marketing and have to say that NEVER before, LONG after freedom of our great nation was bestowed upon us all by the great Madiba, supported by the millions of previously disadvantaged people, have I seen so much expression of inferiority. After all, for a nation of great and proud people to be so easily offended by such marginal, most likely unintentional ambiguity surprises and disappoints me. I asked this question yesterday. Who on earth would so blatantly go out to offend the customer base of H&M? If it was a white kid in the hoodie there wouldn't have been a peep from anyone. I called all of my children “monkey” at some stage of their youth.”

The underlying delinquency of ignorance is that it positions itself as fact or norm. Both these pundits claim that the global upheaval regarding H&M’s advertisement, albeit their apology, is a “negative hype” and an exaggeration. There is a tone that says ‘hey, you are too sensitive.’ Furthermore, there is an awkward directive that informs anyone who is offended by the advert to keep quiet and move on as “they have apologised”, “why keep punishing them?” What’s more nonsensical is that the pundits seem to have a global mandate to instruct Africans and anyone who finds the advert offensive to simply move all along and stop “seeking opportunities to punish” the authors of racially offensive content.

On a very simplistic level, one of the pundits tries to provide some insights on how Africans should react to racism and stating it as “an expression of inferiority” and that the offended people are “easily offended by such marginal.” To a significant extent, this demonstrates a consistent lack of consideration and the insensitive nature by these two-specific pundit’s and others with similar narratives around the world who deliberately display racism masquerading as care and fact.

The fact is – you don’t get to offend someone, tell them how they should feel, when they should feel, how long they should be offended, and when they should simply stop and move on. That is the fundamental nature of deep rooted racism.

As for the H&M brand, remember, a brand is a promise fulfilled. The customers will eventually decide if you fulfill or break your promise.

To my learned pundits; I have two recommendations for you:

1.   Read Lyndon B. Johnson’s speech delivered on 4 June 1965:

“FREEDOM IS NOT ENOUGH But freedom is not enough. You do not wipe away the scars of centuries by saying: Now you are free to go where you want, and do as you desire, and choose the leaders you please.

You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, "you are free to compete with all the others," and still justly believe that you have been completely fair.”

2.   Read this piece which was published by The Conversation Africa: Comparing Black People to Monkeys has a Long, Dark Simian History

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Tshepo Matseba is former President of the Public Relations Institute of Southern Africa (PRISA). He holds a number of roles including, Business Editor of The Afropolitan magazine and Editor-in-Chief of the NEPAD Yearbook. Tshepo is the chairman of the judging panel for the South African Brand Summit & Awards. He writes in his personal capacity.