“GAP CHINA18” T-Shirt Controversy “Unintentional Blunder” or “Deliberate Act”? Interpretations from a Cultural Key Symbols’ Perspective

Fengru Li
{"title":"“GAP CHINA18” T-Shirt Controversy “Unintentional Blunder” or “Deliberate Act”? Interpretations from a Cultural Key Symbols’ Perspective","authors":"Fengru Li","doi":"10.30845/ijbss.v9n5a4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This explorative case study addresses consequences of MNCs’ controversial branding practices across national and cultural boundaries. Bi-lingual reviews of over fifty news reports in both English and Chinese, interpretations of over 1,000 microblog messages divulge the divisive issue whether the controversy of the Gap’s China 2018 tshirt be an MNC’s “unintentional blunder,” or a “deliberate act” of unprovoked insult to indigenous consumers. Explanatory insights are gained with Sheehan’s framework of “Controversial Advertising” and Ortner’s concept of “Cultural Key Symbols.” Findings include: indigenous netizens with the onset of technological advances inhabit the new landscape of defying Gap’s social insult within 24 hours which led to Beijing’s unusual involvement; the Gap practice is deemed controversial for its misuse or creative use of the cultural key symbol as logo; and perceived insincere apology permeates distrust. In controversial branding practices, any distortional use of key cultural symbols, be it a deliberate or unintentional act, would have the power to empower, reinforce, or aggravate a collective ethnic identity. This Gap controversy has epitomized such aggravated cultural identity.","PeriodicalId":108255,"journal":{"name":"International journal of business and social science","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of business and social science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30845/ijbss.v9n5a4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This explorative case study addresses consequences of MNCs’ controversial branding practices across national and cultural boundaries. Bi-lingual reviews of over fifty news reports in both English and Chinese, interpretations of over 1,000 microblog messages divulge the divisive issue whether the controversy of the Gap’s China 2018 tshirt be an MNC’s “unintentional blunder,” or a “deliberate act” of unprovoked insult to indigenous consumers. Explanatory insights are gained with Sheehan’s framework of “Controversial Advertising” and Ortner’s concept of “Cultural Key Symbols.” Findings include: indigenous netizens with the onset of technological advances inhabit the new landscape of defying Gap’s social insult within 24 hours which led to Beijing’s unusual involvement; the Gap practice is deemed controversial for its misuse or creative use of the cultural key symbol as logo; and perceived insincere apology permeates distrust. In controversial branding practices, any distortional use of key cultural symbols, be it a deliberate or unintentional act, would have the power to empower, reinforce, or aggravate a collective ethnic identity. This Gap controversy has epitomized such aggravated cultural identity.
“GAP CHINA18”t恤争议是“无心之失”还是“蓄意之举”?文化关键符号视角下的解读
这个探索性的案例研究探讨了跨国公司跨越国家和文化界限的有争议的品牌实践的后果。对50多篇中英文新闻报道的双语评论,对1000多条微博信息的解读,揭示了Gap 2018中国t恤引发的争议是跨国公司的“无意失误”,还是对本土消费者的无端侮辱的“蓄意行为”。通过Sheehan的“有争议的广告”框架和Ortner的“文化关键符号”概念,获得了解释性的见解。研究发现:随着技术进步的开始,本土网民在24小时内栖居在反抗Gap社会侮辱的新景观中,这导致了北京的不同寻常的介入;Gap的做法被认为是有争议的,因为它误用或创造性地使用文化关键符号作为标志;而觉察到的不真诚的道歉则渗透着不信任。在有争议的品牌实践中,任何对关键文化符号的扭曲使用,无论是有意还是无意的行为,都有可能增强、加强或加剧集体的种族认同。Gap的争议是这种恶化的文化认同的缩影。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信