Today in 60 seconds
Converse pulled an ad that critics said evoked the KKK and a lynching, sent reporters a brief apology, and hasn't posted a word on its own channels since. The story has ignited intense social backlash and widespread global media coverage.
Plus, UNGA's General Debate opens tomorrow with Trump expected day one. The Iran war and the race to replace Guterres are the two subjects in every room.
And in Germany, IG Metall's 100,000-worker action day is today, three days after VW cut its margin forecast to 1%.
Earnings this week include Costco, Accenture, Darden, KB Home. Nike reports late this month, and Converse will definitely be a question on that call.
The apology Converse sent, and the one it should have
WWD
Last Thursday, an image from Converse went viral for all the wrong reasons.
Posted to its Threads account on September 3, Converse shared an asset from its new Chuck 70 X campaign that launched globally on 27 August. If you haven’t seen it, it shows K-pop star Karina in a long white skirt, standing in a star-shaped spotlight, holding a pair of black sneakers by the laces. Critics said the triangle of light on the skirt looked like a KKK hood and the dangling shoes like the feet of a lynching victim.
Not everyone agrees the campaign deserves this level of backlash. Some people see an accident nobody caught, some see a shadow and nothing else, and others argue that in advertising nothing is accidental. I'm not going to settle that here.
What we can all agree on though is that by Friday the story had gone from Threads to People, TMZ and Adweek, and by Sunday it was on the AP wire with calls for a boycott. At that scale the argument about intent is over, because the ad can no longer do the one job it’s supposed to do which is to sell shoes. From there it has to be handled as a business problem, and the statement is where Converse started handling it.
Friday afternoon, Converse sent a brief statement to Footwear News, WWD, People, Adweek and others: "We're sorry. We understand why this image is deeply upsetting and recognize that we got this wrong. We removed it from our channels and are working to remove it everywhere it appeared. This should not have happened, and we will do better."
Three things about that statement.
The statement went by email to reporters and, as far as I can find, nowhere on Converse's own accounts, and the brand said nothing else beyond it. It says the image was "removed" but WWD, Footwear News and Snopes all noted the image was still up on the brand's Threads by the time of publication. And it's written in the singular, "this image," while the backlash had already pulled in a second picture, from a Converse x Palmes collaboration posted on September 14 on Converse Malaysia's Instagram, showing a man on a ladder reaching for sneakers hanging from a tree.
Then the apology exit conditions changed.
Rep. Troy Carter of Louisiana said, "You do not get to quietly pull the images, issue a polished apology and move on. You do not get a do-over." He asked the questions that many others were also asking which is, "Who created this campaign? Who approved it? How many executives saw it? Were there any Black people in the room? If so, did anyone listen to them?" He set the bar for the next round of response which is that repairing the harm "will require more than an apology written by your PR department." And he addressed the parent company. He opened his statement with, "Nike and Converse, what the hell were you thinking?"
Nike still hasn't said anything as far as I can tell.
The scorecard
I have a framework I use to test draft apologies before they go out. I ran Converse's statement through it and while it passes every question about tone, it fails every question about substance.
Does one sentence say what we did? Sort of. "We got this wrong" has the right subject, but "this" never gets specifically named. And "we understand why this image is deeply upsetting" is a sentence about people's reaction, not about what Converse did.
Does the solution have a date and an owner? No. "We will do better" is hope.
Has every fact been checked? No. The one claim that was easy to confirm, "we removed it from our channels," was false when it first went out.
Can people respond? No, which is why everyone is piling on in other channels and social posts.
Whatever you make of the content itself, one question for your own org is about process: who reviews creative before it goes out, and what are they asked to look for? I can't tell you who was in the Converse marketing conference room but what I can tell you from personal experience is that most approval processes are built to check the wrong things. Brand guidelines, legal clearance, the ambassador's contract, product in frame. Everyone reviewing is asking "does this match the brief?" and not everyone is asking "what else could this look like?" That second question is a very different job and it needs somebody whose role is to look for the thing the creative team didn't intend, and importantly who can stop the asset from going out when they find something questionable.
Based on the gaps in the published statement, here's the draft I'd have put in front of them. It specifies what happened, gives the fix a date and an owner, and costs the company something today. It doesn't vaguely point to promises of “we’ll do better next time” and it doesn’t try to explain the intent of the creative.
Last month, we approved campaign assets that evoked images of the KKK and racial terror. The history of racist violence in America is deep and painful, and any echo of it in our work means we got it wrong. Intended or not, that's ours to own and ours to make right. Next week, we're bringing our global marketing team together to review how campaign assets get approved, and we've asked [XYZ Firm] to audit that process independently. Until then, the Chuck 70 X campaign is paused globally. We're sorry.
For Converse, anything on its own channels today would be the first time it has spoken where the image actually ran.
Nike is the next voice I’ll be looking at. It owns Converse and they haven’t said a word. Earnings are due at the end of the month; this will be on the call whether or not it's in the script.
Then Karina who is mid-world tour, fans attacking her rather than the brand, and her agency hasn't responded to media inquiries. Last year, SM Entertainment apologized within days when she drew criticism in Korea. Silence here is a real choice.
And the backlash to the backlash will grow, because the only people who can call this overblown are the ones with no stake in it. Plus, the one move that ends it hasn't been made yet which is to say how it happened and what changes next.
CCO Global Watch
UNGA opens tomorrow. The General Debate starts Tuesday and Trump is expected to speak on day one, as the US usually does. This week is about two things: the Iran war, now past six months with Hormuz still mostly shut, and the race to replace Guterres, which is happening in the corridors.
Houthi missiles shot at Riyadh. The East-West pipeline that carried up to four million barrels a day around Hormuz is still shut after drone strikes earlier this month, and on Saturday the Houthis fired a ballistic missile at Riyadh itself. The Saudis are shuttling crude out through Hormuz under US cover and say half the pipeline is back; but analysts say it will take weeks to months, and Brent is holding above $100. Last week this was a supply story. A missile at the capital makes it a question of whether the Gulf's biggest producer is now a target, and that's the question every CEO with people or operations in the region gets today
IG Metall action day. Germany's largest union, IG Metall, is holding a nationwide action day today, with more than 100,000 workers expected across carmakers and suppliers protesting job cuts and plant closures. It comes three days after Volkswagen cut its 2026 profit-margin forecast to one percent and its CFO told staff in a memo that "we have no time to lose." VW meant that line as a call to cut costs faster, and the union is reading it as confirmation of what's coming. Any European industrial company announcing restructuring this week is doing it into that crowd.