Calvin Klein underwear ad sparks controversy

[Flossie]

Calvin Klein has no plans to pull a controversial ad featuring a shot up the dress of a young looking model.  

The shot is part of a fill in the blank campaign: I _________ in #mycalvins.  In this particular shot, the sentence reads "I flash in my Calvins".  

Calvin Klein says that the ad makes it clear that the model is choosing to expose her panties, not having the picture taken by a hidden camera.  As for the ad appearing to feature a teen (personally, I thought she looked 12), the company sees nothing wrong with that because the model is actually 23, and sex sells.

I guess the controversay helps distract from the realization that the underwear itself isn't all that different from what could be bought anywhere else.

http://nypost.com/2016/05/12/calvin-klein-is-marketing-to-perverts/

http://qz.com/682846/calvin-kleins-hypersexual-new-ad-campaign-is-creeping-people-out-just-like-the-old-days/

[polecat]

Calvin Klein has always had questionable taste in ads. This one strikes me as really gross because of the number of upskirt incidents lately if nothing else. It's in particularly poor taste. Fine, the model is 23 and a willing participant. It doesn't make the ad any more appealing. 

As for "sex sells,"

Quote

"Says who? Just so you know, the people who talk that way think that monkeys can do this. They take all this monkey crap and just stick it in a briefcase completely unaware that their success depends on something more than their shoeshine. YOU are the product. You- FEELING something. That's what sells. Not them. Not sex. They can't do what we do, and they hate us for it." ~Don Draper

 

Okay, so that's a fictional character, but I always have loved that quote.

[FundieFarmer]

Something else will always sell if the marketers are smart enough to take the time to create it.

[Geechee Girl]

Poor taste, indeed. This is right up there in the creep factor with American Apparel. 

[mstee]

I don't see this as "art". Taking a picture underneath a woman's skirt, putting it on a billboard, and defending it as "she's not underage; sex sells" does not sway my feelings about images like this. This company has a history of advertisements that are over-the-top sexually. I saw one online that was banned in Australia- it heavily implied rape. How the hell is that supposed to make me want to buy jeans? 

[Howl]

eeeesh!  That's just wrong.  Publications always have the option to NOT run that ad and consumers can refuse to buy that product.  Consumers do have a bit of power through boycott.