ISSUE 010
DECOLONIZING OUR ASPIRATIONS
PERSPECTIVES ON PERFORMATIVE “INCLUSIVITY”
originally released 9 February 2021
click here to shop the Black History Month Impact Initiative
Over the past week, we've seen many mainstream brands and retailers attempt to address Black History Month - some more successfully than others. In this issue, I'd like to delve a bit deeper into examining the problematic aspects of these often performative marketing efforts.
But first, I want to share an exciting new addition to our BHM Impact Initiative. Hopefully, you've had a chance to explore the participating Black-owned brands, which are all donating a portion of this month's sales to some amazing non-profit organizations. In case you need some inspiration, we've partnered with Callia Hargrove, founder of Backstory Consulting, to share a curated edit of her favorite products!
Our Impact Initiative aims to provide an easy, accessible means of shopping directly from Black-owned brands while simultaneously supporting non-profit organizations (Revisionary doesn't make any money from this project). Comparatively, when shopping at large mainstream retailers, it's important to remember that a significant cut from any sale (usually around 50%) goes to the corporation selling the products - not the brand itself.
Recognizing this, it's important to think critically about these retailers' activations commemorating Black History Month, which can range from completely tone deaf to somewhat thoughtful. The root problem is that - no matter how well-executed a campaign might seem - most of these big brands and retailers are still only superficially capitalizing on this month as a sales occasion, rather than making fundamental changes to their business in the long term. On The Fashion & Race Database, a newly published essay by Dr. Jonathan M. Square identifies this type of performative gesture as "corporate virtue signaling " - an attempt to superficially appease demands for diversity and create a mirage of inclusivity through temporary activations.
“Diversity should be made intrinsic to a brand’s ethos and an ongoing conversation...”
The essay doesn't specifically address Black History Month campaigns, but more broadly explores the tendency for brands to engage in this sort of performative marketing in a variety of circumstances, such as after being called out for racism or cultural appropriation. It specifically interrogates the phenomenon of all-Black castings, and examines how this is often a technique used by brands to market the concept of inclusivity without actually understanding or implementing true inclusion within their businesses - which would require real, structural change. Instead of ensuring that Black people are involved at all levels of the business organization and creative process, in these superficial campaigns, "their Blackness is reduced to exoticism, camp, or avatars of inclusivity."
“...I would challenge brands and magazines to sustain diverse castings - not make it a gimmick and then go back to the status quo after self-righteously patting themselves on the back.”
Square makes a point to note that all-Black castings are not always problematic - the key is whether these campaigns and activations are authentic to the brand and reflected within their corporate structures year-round: "Diversity should be made intrinsic to a brand's ethos and an ongoing conversation...Though I applaud all-Black castings when done genuinely, I would challenge brands and magazines to sustain diverse castings - not make it a gimmick and then go back to the status quo after self-righteously patting themselves on the back...I would encourage them to act thoughtfully and make sure that their actions have lasting effects. And don't use black bodies as window dressing or, worst, an egregious display of moral grandstanding."
These takeaways are similarly applicable towards many of the Black History Month initiatives we are currently seeing from major brands and retailers. Yesterday, an article in Business of Fashion (paywalled) took a closer look at the promises brand's made in June, activations around Black History Month, and the actual reality of what - if any - changes are being made structurally. As Harlem Fashion Row founder Brandice Daniel is quoted saying, "I think the real question will be, where are we next year?"
“Will consumers notice and hold retailers accountable if they take superficial action or back off from ambitious targets promised at the peak of the protests?”
Perhaps most telling are the results of a CFDA survey of 1,000+ fashion professionals in which 59% said that their company had taken action in response to racial injustice but 40% said they were not sure if any changes would actually be lasting. The article asks, "Will consumers notice and hold retailers accountable if they take superficial action or back off from ambitious targets promised at the peak of the protests?" And companies that have made promises are one thing - many large retailers haven't actually made any concrete commitments to change (Net-a-Porter, Saks Fifth Avenue, Shopbop, Hudson’s Bay, Ssense and Neiman Marcus are some that are mentioned in the article).
So when looking at 'inclusive' campaigns by major brands and retailers - whether this month or in the future - just remember to take a moment to consider whether it is actually representative of the business, or simply a performative marketing stunt.
explore www.revisionary.space
follow @revisionary.space
contact hello@revisionary.space
