If Abercrombie & Fitch doesn’t use sex—straight, gay, whatever—to sell clothes, I don’t know who does. But it’s their thing…and they’re doing what they wanna do—clearly with some success as measured (non-scientifically) by the number of American teen bedroom walls plastered with Abercrombie ad swipe and posters.
Using sex to sell clothes, however, isn’t as easy as it seems. It means hiring hot models and shooting casually suggestive poses—all while promoting the Abercrombie line. And shooting a casually suggestive shot can have a few glitches. Like, what if the model is having an off day and the photographer can’t quite elicit that relaxed, euphoric, post-sex look from the model?
Well, according to the $1 million sexual harassment lawsuit filed by former A&F employee and wannabe A&F model, Benjamine Bowers, getting the right look can apparently require some manual intervention. Bowers alleges that his modeling agent told him to take his clothes off and masturbate in front of the camera so that his euphoric look could be captured right as it was happening. (Who knows, maybe his agent’s been studying method acting…)
According to an article on Reuters, Bowers complied with the directive. While that could beg the question: ‘why he didn’t just say “no” and high-tail it out of there?’, visions of possibly becoming the next Abercrombie guy with a billboard splattered across Times Square apparently kept him there.
Regardless, the lawsuit goes on to allege that the modeling agent then showed his stuff (trying to keep it clean here) and was making comparisons between their equipment. Which, Bowers allegedly took as a bit of a come-on. Really?
Bowers lawsuit names Abercrombie & Fitch, Hollister Co. California, AIG Model & Talent Management, A&F and Hollister affiliates, and two individuals, the modeling agent and Abercrombie’s casting director, as defendants. And, according to a report at Courthouse News, Bowers is seeking more than $1 million in damages for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, fraud in the inducement, rescission due to fraud, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, deceit, sexual harassment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and negligent hiring and supervision.
What? The uber-hip, ultra-prep and ubiquitous Abercrombie & Fitch is at the center of an EEOC Complaint re: banning a Muslim employee from wearing her hijab (aka head scarf, for those of you less “hip” to all things diverse). Perish the thought!
Say it isn’t so, but oh, it’s true! Seems the Brand is the Look, and the Look is All-American-prep and so—you know, by that theory of transitivity you learned in prep school—well, the Brand is All-American-prep. Like complete mirror image. And we know brand integrity is Everything. Cap E intended.
Abercrombie & Fitch lost me a number of years ago—they used to be this quiet, reserved, quality outfitter with a store nestled in the upper recesses of Trump Tower on 5th in NYC. But then things changed. With folks like J. Crew eating up market share, well, A & F apparently found themselves in need of a re-image. Repositioning. ReBranding.
Rebrand—and expand with companies like Hollister—they did. Go into a store now and you’ll be greeted by a sea of 20-something oneness and assimiliation set to the backdrop of glaring music. Their black & white ads suggest a more “knowing” (yes, sexually) and somewhat monied and genteel crowd that I imagine the sales side of the biz only wishes it could duplicate on the sales floor. But there’s the rub. It can’t.
See, you can homogenize your ad campaign. Not so your sales staff.
So what happens when brand image isn’t playing out at the stores, or in this particular case on the stockroom floor of A&F subsidiary brand Hollister? If you’re a district manager who clearly didn’t read Read the rest of this entry »