Originally posted by cyberdude78
Funny thing is back in fifth grade, that would've been around 2001, the police officer who did my school's DARE program actually talked about this.
He had mentioned that some hat companies market towards gang wannabes by intentionally placing gang symbols on the hats. If there's any truth to
what he said then it's really nothing new. That or it's at least not a new idea.
Right. Nothing is new. Companies exist to exploit markets, niche or otherwise. One can find companies that cater to motorcycle gangs, hate groups,
and model of morality homemakers. Nothing is off limits, nothing at all. And, well, that's just America. Good stuff and bad stuff.
I think that companies should take more responsibility for what happens in the communities that they target their wares to. New Era knows what it is
doing. I don't think it's the worst thing, but what they are doing can be seen as a sign of encouragement. Just like MTV they are promoting
images, images that are meant to be seen as cool by young people, many of whom haven't even graduated high school yet, and many who don't want to
have anything to do with gangs. Of course it's just clothing and not a lethal weapons that they are selling, but it is encouragement to associate
gang fashions with coolness, and peer pressure among young people is great. New Era takes advantage of that and increases that pressure with the
placement of their clothing in music videos and magazines and magazines. I would bet that New Era hires street teams to wear their fashions in the
hopes that the consumers will take note and follow suit. I don't doubt for a minute that the marketing department for New Era has a promotional
budget that specifically gives away free merchandise to those folks likely to wear their products.
To be fair, gangs would probably choose to wear New Era's line of clothing regardless of whether or not they were intentionally marketed to, right?
Though, I still see a difference between that and New Era specifically integrating gang symbols into their products.
I guess New Era figures that they are not responsible for the choices that a person makes, like joining or associating with gangs, but on the other
hand what about mistaken identities during a drive-by shooting? They cannot be held responsible for any crimes committed involving criminals and
victims wearing their clothing either, but the images that they are promote and help to perpetuate does have a bearing on how their customers are
perceived to be living their lives. Still that's not New Era's problem either. They just want to see money. New Era has a choice, however, of
whether or not to cater to groups that are known to have violent conflicts with each other. It's obvious that New Era wouldn't make any money if
they only catered to gangs, and so the decision to make gang fashions appeal to folks who are not in gangs, and that live in areas where gangs are
prominent, is sleazy, in my opinion. But let's not forget New Era's partners in crime, the NBA, the NFL, and MLB. If those organizations didn't
license their trademarks to be associated with gang wear then New Era wouldn't be able to use them.
My analysis is that FOX News ran the story to create or to help perpetuate controversy so that New Era's fashions would sell more. After all, the
FOX Corporation makes lots of money on advertising during the airing of professional sports, right? Don't believe the hype.