New American Apparel Advert Banned In The UK

American Apparel Banned Advert Featured

American Apparel is kind of known for its sexually charged advertising campaigns, so they must have really crossed the line on their new advert to get it banned right?

American Apparel Banned Advert Featured

Everyone seems to wear American Apparel hoodies these days. They just look so clean and cool, right? I really wanted to get an American Apparel hoodie once but it was too expensive and everyone has one so I just bought one that looks kinda similar to it from Asda for about a tenner and wear that instead. It’s cool, nobody has noticed yet and I’m still accepted in most social circles and sometimes I even score chicks wearing it which is awesome because they’re none the wiser. So yeah my advice would be just to do that, but I guess not everyone can pull that look off so most of you reading this will probably need to stick with your American Apparel. That’s still a good look though, don’t worry about it too much.

But what is it about American Apparel that has made it so popular and cool over the last few years? Sure it’s fairly decent affordable clothing but so is my Asda hoodie and ain’t nobody out there wearing that except for me. It’s probably got something to do with all those cool Amerian Apparel advertising campaigns that are all over the places that have just helped to brand it as the coolest/edgiest stuff to wear, right? I mean almost every single ad for them that I’ve ever seen has featured some kind of sexual implications or soft nudity and that just makes it so hip and that’s why loads of teenage boys rush ot to buy their hoodies. That has to be it right? I mean they keep doing these advertising campaigns so you would think that it would at least be working, right?

Anyway, it seems that they’ve pushed the boat out a little too far with their latest advert and it has been BANNED in the UK. OMG! Check out the picture below:

Banned American Apparel Ad

Hmm. Is this really that bad? I mean the crotch shot is a bit gross but mainly because it looks like she’s wearing really horrible underwear, more than because it’s too sexy for people to see or anything. So what did this advert do to step out of line exactly? Here’s the official Advertising Standards Authority statement on the advert , which is pretty fvcking jokes:

‘The (ASA) said that the model pictured appeared to be potentially under the age of 16. The watchdog added that whilst the image did not contain explicit nudity, the “amateur” photo, the model’s pose and her unsmiling expression meant the photo would be interpreted as having “sexual undertones” and a “voyeuristic quality”. It concluded the ad inappropriately sexualised a model who appeared to be a child and was therefore irresponsible.’

I guess this is fair enough because there’s nothing cool about young sexualising really young girls but I mean there’s no way American Apparel would use an underage model for something like this given their history (they get in trouble for a lot of their ad campaigns over stuff like this) and also pretty much every single one of their ad campaigns ever has been overtly sexual and has usually featured fairly young girls looking sexy/being naked. Although having said that I don’t think I’ve ever seen one that featured a girl who looks this young but yeah, I still think it’s a fairly tame reason for banning the advert. I mean just because she looks like she might be in a Harmony Korine film doesn’t mean she actually is? I guess that’s what they were going for with the lo fi camera shot though and that is kinda gross so maybe it did deserve to be banned. Meh, who am I kidding, the fact it got banned is only going to make American Apparel even cooler/edgy. They probably made it with the intention of getting it banned, the jokers. Anyway, here’s American Apparel’s retort:

‘…the model was over 18 years of age and was shown wearing products that were meant for adult consumers. (They) pointed out that the ad was placed in Vice magazine, which is a publication written for adults. Vice Magazine said the ad contained no nudity and that in the wider context of fashion and underwear advertising, the image was “tame and tasteful.’

LOL obviously the advert was due to run on the back of Vice, how could it not? Anyway, I kinda agree with what they’re saying, I don’t think there’s really anything bad about that advert at all and can’t honestly believe it’s been banned. I guess people are a bit weird about that kinda stuff in this country at the moment though because of all that Jimmy Savile shit that has been going down recently, but still, it seems surprising. Anyone else agree or is it just me?

☛ More: American Apparel Backlash As Storm Victims Were Targeted With ‘SandySale’

☛ More: Old Photos Of Jimmy Savile That Now Look Really Perverted 

☛ More: We Went To A Vice Party…..And Here Are The Photos 


To Top