The giant has been famous in the past for hiring cover models such as Kim Kardashian to sport its wares, so we’re kind of mystified as to why they even needed this secondary ad campaign, but here we are. The new ad campaign consists of children who are scarcely old enough to walk, we’re talking toddler age, holding teddy bears that are in bondage gear. Not even cute bondage gear from the looks of it, stuff that would normally frighten a child that age.
The children, even though they really don’t know the implications of what they’re being photographed for, look sort of miserable in the campaign ads as well. This could just be a choice on the part of the photographer, but what toddler can be coached to look miserable?
Here’s What Happened: Balenciaga Took DISGUSTING Direction In Advertising
Also, some people have zoomed in on some documents that seem to be in a stack of papers in the ad. The stack of papers is actually a printed version of a supreme court opinion on a case that protects artists from being accused of producing child pornography.
The opinion in question is Ashcroft vs. Free Speech, which states that an artistic representation is okay as long as the minor is not participating in anything explicit or for adults only. Interesting way of incorporating that language into the photoshoot, but the question remains, why?
Within these documents, people have also made the connection that there is a document referencing Metro Management Services, a company that has previously been linked to a lot of missing children in Washington D.C., the thing is currently the connection between this company and these cases is not exactly known, we just know that they are involved somehow – perhaps they are the agency that are supposed to be reporting on these particular missing children or perhaps this is the company that does media for missing children specifically, it’s not known other than they are linked to the cases.
The thing is why would Balenciaga have anything to say about this issue in particular? Are they trying to make a statement on human trafficking problems perhaps? Is this some kind of a weird, sick PR stunt?
It seems that now Balenciaga is trying to backtrack and has removed some of the pictures from their website, even the photographer that snapped the photos had removed some from his own website and now Balenciaga has one picture in particular of one boy which doesn’t make the brand look any better. Especially now that Balenciaga has basically deleted their entire social media profiles, pictures and all, and have seemingly made a move to start over.
