Sweeney vs. Katseye: The ‘jeans war’ and what it means about the culture we’re living in

I usually stray far away from pop culture controversies because, frankly, there’s too many of them and they tend to fizzle out in no time.

However, the “jeans war,” as it is being termed, is unique in the fact that it revolves around an ad war and eugenics. 

In an age of content saturation, I don’t think there are many ads that we’d watch willingly, let alone discuss their cultural implications.

Nevertheless, this is what seems to have transpired with the American Eagle versus Gap commercial controversy. In an increasingly polarized society, some people were quick to label the American Eagle ad as supporting eugenics, while others immediately characterized the critics as “woke.”

There’s a lot of moving pieces here, so let’s back up a bit. There are a few short videos from American Eagle starring actress Sydney Sweeney, which make a pun about how great her jeans/genes are. The campaign is even called “Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans.”

A section of people on social media were quick to react to what they saw as a problematic underlying message that white “genes” are portrayed as being somehow better. The MAGA crowd seized at this opportunity, with both U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice-President JD Vance supporting the ad and Sweeney, who is reportedly a registered Republican. 

Seemingly as a response to the American Eagle ad, Gap released its own, which has almost 42 million views on YouTube, featuring global girl group Katseye and promoting individuality, diversity, and inclusion.

I feel that although labelling Sweeney’s American Eagle ad as promoting eugenics is a bit far fetched, in Trumpland, corporations are quick to kowtow to power. With several American companies cancelling or decreasing DEI appointments and walking back on inclusivity measures — and where the world’s richest person did a questionable “salute” — I don’t think people are wrong to perceive this cultural shift somewhere where it might not exist.

It doesn’t help that big corporations hold a huge cultural sway over the North American population and can shape cultural conversations through their marketing campaigns. The American Eagle ad featuring a blonde celebrity talking about genes was sure to elicit some level of backlash, given the history of race relations in the western world. Therefore, it appears tone deaf.

Also, in an age where our corporate overlords are much too happy to give in to whatever the government wants, I don’t think it is alarmist to question marketing that might try to pander to that sentiment.

This brings me to the cultural context and importance advertisements and brands carry in an increasingly consumerist and capitalist society. Advertising, if done well, can resonate and connect with businesses’ target audiences or beyond — or they can exclude and create buzz in the name of marketing.

Companies should not neglect the ethical and moral responsibilities they have towards the communities they serve and are a part of. Nothing exists in a vacuum, and brands’ marketing choices are constantly informed by the cultural zeitgeist of their era.

Sometimes, it’s just a matter of choice whether brands want to shape cultural conversations and represent diverse audiences or cater to the prevailing ideologies of their time.

In an era where we seem to be walking back on the few protections that society had put in place for marginalized peoples, the choice should be clear.