Balenciaga apologises for bondage bear advert involving child

[PandorasMailbox]

They're also taking legal action against its creator

What I want to know is who the hell signed it off and why were the parents happy to let it go ahead?

I've included the images for anyone who hasn't seen them.

I don’t really care if the photographer experiences fallout. He didn’t create the set, but he is party to it by having taken those photos. I understand he didn’t take the one with the Supreme Court document, but he did take the ones with the children. Everyone involved is responsible.

I.can‘t wrap my mind around the fact that decision makers at Balenciaga signed off on the campaign or campaigns (I though it was one but apparently not?).
The customers of Balenciaga are fashion-conscious women, not some guys who are into kink and innuendo regarding Child sexual abuse. So WHY???
Even if I as the decision maker were into such pics, surely I would not sign off on the campaign but find an escuse for not publishing what I ordered and just keep the pics privately? It makes no sense.

Everyone involved has their mind so open, the brains have fallen out but how did the parents let their kids be staged like this? Or sign off?

Just for clarification, the child is not heavily masked. I blanked out her face to protect her identity. She is staring, unsmiling, Ito the camera. She looks unsure, worried.

Apologies for not making that clear.

Most of the children in those photos- the lined up toy photos as well- look miserable. They are sometimes perched up somewhere uncomfortable. And I'm really unhappy about the wide open window behind the girl on the sofa upthread. I don't generally spot what everyone else is talking about, just a feeling of unease, but that window makes me twitch.

I've missed the issue with the Baal tape? What's that about?

And why is the middle of Clemene's photos problematic?

The certificate being displayed to the left of the model is made out to John Phillip Fisher. That is the name of a man convinced of sexually assaulting his granddaughter from the age for 4 for years and years.

Baal is the name of an ancient god, associated with the sacrifice of children.

Fucking hell.

It's obviously one or more pedophiles involved.

I have no idea how something like this gets investigated. Has a crime even been committed?

What happens now? Do Balenciaga and the photographer blame each other until something else happens elsewhere and people are distracted by whatever that is,and this is forgotten?
Have any offences been committed and will the people behind this be held to account?
If all that happens is some internet outrage for a few days, then it's business as usual,nothing changes.

I would have though the photographer needed to restore his reputation otherwise his livelihood is threatened, if not ruined.

Surely he'll sue?

I don’t think any criminal offences have been committed- maybe some breaches of advertising regulations, possible some breaches of contract by various parties.

Yes. The only way to start lifting the stone is if someone uses.

What's the likelihood the photographer gets paid off?

I cant help thinking it was a mistake to blame him so roundly.

*sues, not 'uses'.

I cant help thinking it was a mistake to blame him so roundly

I agree, it was very knee jerk.

I don't think they've done anything illegal but I would hope the police would take a closer look at everyone involved in these campaigns.

When I watched the runway show yesterday, I saw models with make up to make them look like they're bruised and bleeding.

No one said anything about that when the show happened. I saw the mud trench getting a lot I'd press coverage but sending models out looking like they'd been physically abused? Silence.

It feels like they're upping the ante trying to shock and push boundaries. And desensitise.

It scares me.

Datun I think that you are right on both counts.He's left with no option but to sue if he wants to keep his reputation,but having this all forensically detailed in court,about exactly who conceptualised the shoot and how many people ok'd it before it was signed off is not something that the company will want. So I agree that a pay off is more than likely.

Either side going to court runs the risk of a 'Mermaids Moment' and we've all seen the fall out from that.

@PicturesOfDogs I know about Baal but can't see why we're talking about him. What reference have I missed?

That certificate is appalling! The book I could overlook as an arty reference. The court ruling and the certificate- not plausibly deniable.

I'm waiting for the spin that actually what they were doing is highlighting the horror of child abuse with those images and the carefully placed references, but considering they are the company who made the repulsive bag and signed off on using children to advertise it it won't wash with anyone with half a brain.

Creative Director at Balenciaga has comments turned off on Instagram. He’s accountable too. And the team there - more so than the photographers

It would be an interesting case. All of those horrible Easter eggs in those images are in and of themselves not illegal (certainly published judgements and books are not). They are distasteful, and perhaps Balenciaga will claim not in keeping with their corporate image. If there is nothing illegal in these photos, then what is Balenciaga's claim against the photographer? They can't sue him because they public finds the images disturbing. They could claim a breach of his employment contract - that he didn't stick to the brief or their corporate standards - so they would need to produce evidence of the brief and show the photographer's breach of this. A counterclaim by the photographer would be that he did his job as briefed, did not have the final (or any) say over these images and their composition, had no control over set design, publication etc, has been unfairly dismissed and has been libelled as a pedophile, thus damaging his chances of ever working again.

If you've 'never heard of her' I assume it's because your bias prevents you seeking out alternative media.

Candace is huge in the US. She's part of the Daily Wire, the fastest growing and most prolific right wing media production company. Some people would even like her to run for President. Of course you've never heard of her, you only listen to people whose politics you agree with!

And pro-life is an ethical position, albeit not one you agree with or is pro-choice automatically propaganda too?

How do people like you negotiate life only paying attention to people you like? I mean I can't stand James O'brien, for e.g. but I still occasionally listen to him and when the man's right, he's right. Despite me largely not agreeing with his politics. Try and make an effort to widen out your media sources. It's only good. For every 10 things you dislike they'll be a position you agree with.

Exactly.

The photographer is fucked unless he either sues, or gets paid a lot of money.

However, I'm not sure how much money, exactly, would compensate for entirely ruined career. It's not as though he could change his name, since that would be part of his brand.

To clear his name, he has to sue. I bet they're wishing they had been a little more circumspect before they decided it was all his fault.

In fact, I bet there is an internal investigation, and some nameless creative gets blamed and apparently fired.

The end.

@Datun obviously it was the work experience person.......who's now left and gone travelling so can't be contacted....🤫

Balenciaga was spelt ‘Baalenciaga’ with the Baal being the prominent letters shown in some crime scene style type in one of the pictures