Chanel and Russophobia
Since the onset of the military operation in Ukraine, the Russian market witnessed a wave of withdrawals by major Western fashion houses. Big players like Inditex, H&M Group, LVMH, and Kering paused activity in the Russian Federation. Some brands exited entirely for the time being, others reappeared under new names, or signaled intent to return soon. The public response in Russia varied from unease to outright concern, with the most biting critique directed at LVMH, a conglomerate led by Bernard Arnault. In foreign boutiques, purchases from Russian customers were restricted under the sanctions framework. Yet the most attention centered on Chanel. The fashion house faced scrutiny over past associations and memory of Gabrielle Chanel, including a controversial portrayal of its founder during World War II, which resurfaced in public discourse through supposedly provocative street actions in Paris.
“The former rulers of the Great Coco decided to join the anti-Russian campaign to cancel Russia. The Chanel house can return to normal and support Nazism as its creator”, commented Maria Zakharova, the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, highlighting the charged atmosphere surrounding the brand.
A social media flash mob emerged where Russian women publicly cut Chanel bags, challenging the brand’s stance and its appeal to Russian customers. Victoria Bonya, a participant, stated, “If the House of Chanel does not respect its customers, why should we respect the House of Chanel?” The moment underscored how consumer sentiment can become entangled with international politics.
Public figures expressed personal grievances as well. Olga Buzova pressed Chanel to refund expenditures on the brand, while Ksenia Borodina vowed not to fund the house again, and Yana Rudkovskaya hoped for an apology to Russians who felt offended by the brand’s actions.
Dress worn by Kim Kardashian and Marilyn Monroe
2022 proved significant for Kim Kardashian, both personally and in the media spotlight. Despite a highly publicized relationship arc, Kardashian navigated divorce proceedings and financial headlines surrounding the lifestyle brand empire she promotes. Reports surfaced about the dress known for its association with Marilyn Monroe, worn by Kardashian at a high-profile event decades after Monroe first wore it to mark a presidential milestone. The dress, valued at several millions, became a symbol of media frenzy and fashion lore. The decision to alter or remake appearances for such occasions sparked discussion about the pressures of public image, body image, and the calculation behind each appearance.
Kardashian herself described the intense preparation involved, noting extensive dieting, rapid grooming, and the high stakes of a single public moment. Critics and fans alike debated whether the pursuit of fame justified the means, while supporters argued that the spectacle serves as a reminder of fashion history and the power of curated celebrity moments. The debate touched on authenticity, legacy, and the ever-present tension between art and commerce in the couture world.
Onlookers observed that Kardashian’s choices elicited a mixed reception, with some praising the storytelling and others chastising the perceived overemphasis on spectacle. The response spotlighted how iconic garments carry cultural memories, and how the modern media ecosystem amplifies both admiration and ridicule in equal measure. The garment’s provenance and the accompanying narrative continued to fuel conversations about the responsibilities of brands, curators, and celebrities when reimagining historic artifacts.
Balenciaga and the sexualization of children
The fashion sector faced a testing year, with Valentino and others implicated in critiques related to representation and objectification. Dior and Gucci, meanwhile, faced controversy linked to political stances during the Ukraine crisis, while campaigns with themes reminiscent of Soviet-era iconography drew scrutiny. Yet Balenciaga became the focal point of a broader debate about ethics in advertising. A campaign featuring children with leather harnesses drew accusations of sexualizing minors and triggered a broader backlash across social networks. Photographer Gabriel Galimberti, involved in the campaign, faced intense online hostility from various corners of the internet.
Balenciaga’s leadership issued an apology for what it described as a misjudged artistic direction, but the controversy persisted in the public sphere. High-profile collaborators distanced themselves from the brand, and public figures weighed in with varied responses. Kim Kardashian publicly expressed concern about the implications of the imagery, emphasizing the need to avoid normalizing harm. Other influencers and celebrities also reevaluated their associations with Balenciaga in light of the episode.
The broader cultural conversation included commentary from fashion insiders and critics about responsible storytelling, the ethical boundaries of fashion marketing, and whether accountability extends beyond the immediate campaign to the broader industry ecosystem. The episode underscored the fragility of reputations in an ecosystem where every campaign is subject to rapid online scrutiny.
Kanye West and racism
In recent discourse, Kanye West generated significant controversy through provocative statements and public appearances. The artist faced backlash over remarks connected to family, relationships, and political ambitions. During a Paris Fashion Week event, West sparked heated dialogue with comments found by many as endorsing extremist content and controversial messaging on social media. The ensuing debate highlighted the volatile intersection of celebrity culture, social responsibility, and the lasting impact of public rhetoric on brands and partnerships.
Industry voices and media commentators weighed in, with some distancing themselves from the artist while others defended freedom of expression. The episode amplified discussions about the responsibilities of fashion houses and media platforms in amplifying or mitigating controversial viewpoints. It also raised questions about how brands navigate collaboration with public figures who generate polarizing attention while wrestling with public perception and consumer trust.
As the dialogue continued, public figures and institutions placed emphasis on the need for inclusivity and accountability within the industry. The conversations spanned from how campaigns address race and representation to how brands respond when their partners make statements that trigger broad social reactions. The episode served as a reminder that the fashion world exists within a larger social fabric where language and imagery carry consequential weight and can reshape reputations in an instant.