[Photo by Maude Frédérique Lavoie on Unsplash]
October 31, 2025 (Friday) – Yoo Jung & Sun Jung
Once upon a time, a jacket was just a jacket, and a pair of sneakers was merely a means to help move from one place to another. This is no longer. The age has come when, depending on what jeans you wear, you can either support eugenics or you can be “woke garbage.”
In July 2025, American Eagle released a campaign starring Sydney Sweeney, a 28-year-old actress who is blond, blue-eyed, white, symmetrical, conventionally attractive, gorgeous, the list goes on. The ad was titled “Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans,” which is a regular title indeed. Yet, the very sentence is the reason why the ad has recently been the subject of social media discourse. Progressive critics pointed out that the pun made between ‘jeans’ and ‘genes’ entertains the thought that Ms. Sweeney has ‘won the genetic lottery’; thus, they argue that it promotes eugenics, a problematic framework that categorizes certain traits as “superior” by positioning them as the ideal standard. Conversely, many on the political right viewed the campaign as harmless and even empowering. Donald Trump, the 47th president of the United States and now an expert in ad commentary, offered his insights on social media, calling Ms. Sweeney’s ad “The ‘HOTTEST’ ad out there.” Ending it off with, “Go get ‘em, Sydney!”
Just a month later, Gap’s ninety-second “Better in Denim” advertisement premiered. The public’s reaction could not have been more different. The ad features six members from Katseye, dubbed the ‘global girl group,’ with members from the Philippines, South Korea, Switzerland, and the United States under Hybe and Geffen Records. They dance to Kelis’s 2003 Grammy-nominated single “Milkshake,” choreographed by Robbie Blue. The lively advertisement quickly captured the global reach of TikTok dance trends with the #betterindemin, racking up 3k posts on TikTok. Gap reported an earned media value of $1.7 million from the commercial alone.
“This is denim as you define it,” Gap said in a press release. What was once a neutral commodity in our closets became a statement of values. In this case, Gap positioned itself on the basis of identity and inclusivity. Evidently, the approach of being the opposite of American Eagle’s ad has proved effective; the YouTube upload has drawn nearly six million views, with the top comment reading, “Countering THAT controversy ad with a group of successful diverse girls in denim, Gap took that opportunity real fast.” However, the ad also faced some pushback from conservatives online, such as a post with 41,000 likes on X, which called Katseye’s ad “woke garbage.”
In an Associated Press interview, Katseye’s leader, Sophia Laforteza, said that they “only rehearsed it one day…” suggesting a fast-tracked production timeline, possibly to ride the wave of denim-related controversy.
Even after American Eagle explained that their ad was “always about the jeans,” the ad continued to receive criticism, hinting at how impossible neutrality has become. The American Eagle and Gap advertisements transformed political values into consumer choices—whether by design or circumstance. The brand of jeans one buys became shorthand for which political or cultural camp one belongs to.
The phenomenon of politicizing products is seen outside of jeans as well. Nowadays, advertising is often no longer meant just to sell products; it also sells a moral positioning. In other words, brands now market a social cause or identity, and thus moral consumerism is becoming more prevalent– the practice of purchasing goods from a company you share values with. For example, Patagonia is known for its environmental activism, while Nike focuses on empowerment with their slogan “Just Do It.” This shift means buying a product is framed as participating in a broader moral or political narrative, which can blur the line between consumerism and activism.
This moral consumerism is visible online. A viral TikTok video posted by @apkd93 on July 28 with the caption “And so we're no longer shopping at [American Eagle]... right? RIGHT???” racked up 3.5 million views. Similarly, another TikTok post by @houseofhithesh on August 24, which shared Katseye’s Gap advertisement with the caption “The summer I’m buying Gap,” racked up 4.5 million views. In this sense, social media accelerates the politicization of daily consumption, transforming objects into ways to express belief.
Imagine you bought American Eagle jeans just last week. Now, everyone seems to hate the brand. Moving to the larger picture, imagine a world where if you did not do enough “research” on what you consume, you could be labeled radical.
As outrage surged across TikTok and X, the ad’s reach multiplied. From the platforms’ perspective, outrage and affirmation are both profitable. Algorithms often deliver posts that trigger emotion to users—such as anger, envy, desire—that make both ads reach a more extensive audience. Therefore, the controversy around the ad only made it viral, since contemporary algorithms reward engagement over accuracy. For example, American Eagle saw a 300% increase in brand-related user-generated content on TikTok during the campaign, and the American Eagle stock rose by more than 23 percent after President Trump complimented the ad featuring Sydney Sweeney. For Gap, the limited-edition KATSEYE hoodie and jeans sold out rapidly after launch, and in the first week after the ad launched, store foot traffic jumped 8.5%. Political polarization is not a by-product; it can also be a business model.
Outrage, these days, enjoys a rather splendid position as politicizing daily life will remain a spectacle as long as engagement itself is the product and end-goal. Real impact requires structural follow-through. Social platforms must redesign virality to favor context over outrage. Companies must publish audited and ethical goals on labor and environment before they borrow the language of activism. And consumers must learn that attention is not accountability. Visibility has never been scarce. Integrity and action, however, have. Unless outrage ceases to seek relevance and profits, politicization will remain good marketing, not good politics.
Yoo Jung
Sun Jung
