The Fabindia ad controversy: Is ‘cancel culture’ an excuse to bully?
Current Affairs
Last week, the famous clothing retailer ‘Fabindia’ launched its new clothing line, ‘Jashn-e-Riwaaz’, intended for the upcoming festive season in the country.
The title - which roughly translates to “celebration of rituals” - garnered a lot of flak on social media. #BoycottFabindia trended all through last weekend.
Following the backlash, the company has withdrawn its ad campaign.
What prompted the outrage?
The backlash began with a tweet from BJP MP Tejasvi Surya. The young politician asserted that the advertisement is “anti-Hindu” and “anti-national”.
What irked him and some right-wing groups was using an Urdu phrase for a clothing line meant for Diwali. A few also took offence at the absence of bindis from female models who featured in the ad.
But Fabindia isn’t the first brand to face the ire of netizens!
Tanishq and Manyavar trolled
Last year, around the same time, Tanishq had to face the brunt of angry social media users. Its advertisement that featured a Hindu daughter-in-law in a Muslim household was heavily criticized for promoting “love jihad”.
Manyavar, too, was accused of hurting religious sentiments when the companys’ ad spoke against the Hindu tradition of Kanyadaan. It suggested that a bride isn’t a commodity to be donated.
In both cases, the brands were forced to issue an apology and retract their ads.
What is ‘cancel culture’?
Fabindia, Manyavar, and Tanishq are not the only ones who faced public outrage in recent times. Many brands are now victims of a popular concept called ‘cancel culture’.
Cancel culture encourages the public to boycott celebrities, public figures, and brands if their statements and brand propositions are presumed to be hurtful and offensive.
FOR
Speaking to the powerful
For the longest time, brand campaigns were unidirectional - the responses of the public were largely unknown. However, social media enables the less powerful public to broadcast their opinions and bring about a social change swiftly.
For brands, a positive public image plays a vital role in obtaining investments. Ergo, these companies do not risk irking the majority and are compelled to listen to them.
Positive social changes
Recently, the service provider platform, Urban Company, was heavily criticized for charging a high commission fee of 30% from their workers. With the torrent of public outrage, the company had to cut its commission to 25%.
Similarly, the gig companies had to look into the well-being of their employees when the delivery partners and customers threatened to boycott the company due to unfair delivery targets.
AGAINST
Mob mentality
Given their reach amongst the public, brands must strive to symbolize progressive social change and communal harmony. With the cancel culture sword hanging on their heads, brands feel compelled to follow the mob, else face monetary repercussions.
In the long run, this would also harm the progression of society because opinions and views from marginalized groups could be suppressed by the majority!
Violating freedom of speech
In all the cases cited above, the communication from the brands is not against the law of the land. The campaigns launched by the brands were legal and factual. The communication neither promoted violence nor was misleading.
In that case, brands have every right to exercise their fundamental right of speech.
Not liking an ad is a personal and subjective opinion. By gathering like-minded unknowns on social media, the cancel culture mob is bullying the brand to align with their beliefs, else risk suffering economic costs.
Is cancel culture a fair practice that enables citizens to voice their opinions, or is it a toxic idea of bullying?
Like what you read? Share this article with your friends and follow us on:
Instagram | Medium | LinkedIn