Urban Outfitters has done it again. Instead of targeting the self-esteem of young girls across the nation or glamorizing depression, the retro/bohemian/hipster multinational clothing company has now chosen exploit the tragedy of a school shooting in order to sell a new product. The Kent State sweatshirt was advertised this week as a ‘vintage’ look and sold for over $100.

The sweatshirt does not simply sport the name of the school, however; it alludes to the devastating shootings that happened on the Kent State campus on May 4, 1970. After President Nixon announced to the nation the launch of the “Cambodian Incursion” and the military efforts in Cambodia and Vietnam, protestors around the country rose to confront President Nixon and the American government in attempts to recall the declaration.

Kent State was home to one of the many protests, and after students and the surrounding community became rowdy one weekend and volatile in their protesting the Ohio Army National Guard invaded and occupied the campus in order to subdue the outcries. In an attempt to disperse crowds, the guardsman marched their way through campus. A group of guardsmen opened fire on a handful of unarmed students left from the morning’s rally and left four dead and nine injured.

Despite the complexity and controversy of the shootings, the event still struck America as tragic and devastating. The resurfacing of this event through a sweatshirt made by Urban Outfitters, complete with the appearance of dried blood splatters and an overall red tint, is not only heartbreaking, but also unsettling.

It is time like these – when companies like Urban Outfitters go to such measures in order to sell a product – that we must ponder the potential extent of company’s methods in order to make money and acquire free advertising. How far will they go?

The “depression” shirt released earlier this year and the “eat less” shirt promoted in 2010 are two other recent examples of many instances that depict Urban Outfitters’ disturbing sense of style. Perhaps the company is interested in promoting a demeaning clothing line for men and women alike. Perhaps the creators genuinely believe that sporting a shirt ridden with bold letters spelling the leading cause for suicide in America today is fashionable. Or that advocating for eating disorders in young girls is a positive thing for society.

In reality, it is most likely that Urban Outfitters is creating such distasteful products to stir controversy. As we can see from past exhibitions of unsavory clothing and merchandise, Urban Outfitters receives a mass amount of free advertisement and attention from the marketing of these controversial products. Their site gets more hits. They receive more press. They are put in the spotlight. Despite the negative nature of the attention that company receives, it is attention nonetheless. Their merchandise and brand are splashed across newspapers, social networks, and blogs: the very means by which to unveil the derogatory methods of Urban Outfitters works inadvertently to promote them.

So, is Urban Outfitters stepping on toes to gain free advertising? It’s likely. While it is good to be aware and current about what is going on in American culture both today and in our past, we must be wary and critical when we share the company’s latest controversies with our community, and be intentional to accentuate the negative messages of their products rather than broadening their presence in the media as an American clothing line.

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/fashion/urban-outfitters-slammed-red-stained-kent-state-sweatshirt-article-1.1939990

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/07/urban-outfitters-depression-shirt-controversy

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/03/eat-less-urban-outfitters_n_598904.html