The luxury fashion brand, Balenciaga, has filed a $25 million lawsuit against the producers of a controversial advertisement, featuring children dressed in bondage gear alongside BDSM props. The lawsuit is aimed at the production company, North Six, which oversaw the ad campaign that created an association between Balenciaga and child pornography.
According to Balenciaga, the production company exhibited “inexplicable acts and omissions” by including a court decision upholding a criminal prohibition against child pornography in the ad. The lawsuit, filed in the New York State Supreme Court, alleges that North Six’s oversight led to a “false association” between the fashion brand and the disturbing subject matter of the court decision.
The contentious ad, which featured the court decision in a somewhat hidden manner, was released shortly after Balenciaga apologized for a different ad that portrayed children posing with teddy bears in what appeared to be bondage gear.
In response to the controversy, Balenciaga issued a statement on Instagram, expressing that the inclusion of the legal documents in the ad was a result of “reckless negligence.” The company emphasized its efforts to reinforce the structures around its creative processes and validation steps. The ad has since been removed from Balenciaga’s website and was part of the Spring 2023 collaboration with Adidas.
Aside from this ad-related ordeal, Balenciaga also faced criticism for the delayed decision to sever ties with Ye, the rapper formerly known as Kanye West, for making antisemitic comments.
On the other hand, the production company, North Six, declined to provide a comment on the matter. A representative stressed that they were not involved in the prior ad featuring children with teddy bears, did not have creative input in the shoot, and were not present during the final arrangements.
Photographer Gabriele Galimberti, who was responsible for shooting the controversial ad, stated in an Instagram post that he had no say in the choice of props or models used. He clarified that, as is typical in commercial shootings, the direction of the campaign and the selection of displayed objects were not within the photographer’s control.
