Case 2

Appropriating the Samoan

Culture
Another Nike Cultural Faux Pas1

Abstract
In late July of 2013, Nike released a new line of tattoo-like leg tights for
women, not realizing the disastrous effect it would have on the culture of
Fijian, Samoan, and New Zealand people who view it as a males-only sacred
rite of passage. This cultural mistake is not the first for the world’s top athletic
apparel and footwear company. Nike apologized and recalled all unsold
tights, but how can the company make sure it does not co-opt any more
cultural traditions?

Introduction
The steel elevator doors closed tightly in front of Laurissa Wilson, Chief
Marketing Officer at Nike, the world’s most well-known and successful
sporting apparel company. Laurissa had visited the top floor before—but not
on the terms she knew she would be facing today.
While driving to work earlier that morning, she received a phone call
from her assistant and was quickly briefed that the Pro Tattoo Tech Tights
product, launched last week, had just become an international nightmare
for the company. Laurissa listened, acting as though she was shocked, but she
had already anticipated the possibility of having brought to market a con-
troversial product.
The elevator was packed and she knew she would have only a moment to
reflect on what had led to this crisis. Soon, she would be on the top floor,
having to justify her actions with Nike CEO, Harrison Smith.

Nike’s History
Nike, Inc. is currently the number one athletic apparel and footwear company
in the world. Headquartered in Portland, Oregon, it began as a small start-up
run by two men in the 1960s.
Bill Bowerman, a respected track and field coach at the University of
Oregon, partnered with a track star on his team, Phil Knight, to build and sell a
62 Appropriating the Samoan Culture
better running shoe. Together they formed Blue Ribbon Sports in 1964.
Between Bowerman testing his prototype shoes with his track team and
Knight selling shoes out of his car, Nike was established.
A few years later, one of Knight’s fellow Stanford graduates, Jeff Johnson,
joined the pair to expedite the start-up. He developed the ‘‘swoosh’’ logo and
marketing campaigns, thus establishing the brand of Nike that we know
today. Nike revolutionized the athletic industry in the 1970s with its products.
The team of three decided that they needed a brand endorser. Who better
than Steve Prefontaine? (Prefontaine was a long-distance runner from the
University of Oregon who competed in the 1972 Olympics.) His ‘‘fiery spirit’’
and remarkable career made Nike popular, taking it to a new level of growth
(Nike, Inc., 2013).
That growth would continue throughout the decades. They were able to
experience this resounding success through implementing successful mar-
keting campaigns, adopting the tagline, ‘‘Just Do It,’’ and endorsing incredible
athletes such as Bo Jackson and later on Eldrick ‘‘Tiger’’ Woods.
In 2002, Nike took a chance at the ‘‘Secret Tournament’’ campaign. It was
Nike’s first integrated global marketing effort. It was different then their usual
‘‘big athlete, big ad, big product’’ campaigns, in that Nike set out to generate an
experience for its consumers for the World Cup.
The use of many different advertisement channels had explosive results.
Nike ads flooded all aspects of advertising: the Internet, public relations, and
consumer events. In the end, it created excitement for Nike products. This
marketing plan was pivotal in how Nike chose to go to market after the success
of the ‘‘Secret Tournament’’ campaign, and contributed to the company’s
status as a marketing genius (Nike, Inc., 2013).
Nike continues to grow as it keeps its focus on creative marketing cam-
paigns, international growth, and performance-enhancing innovation for
athletes. Nike was also named the official sponsor of the National Football
League (NFL) in early 2012.

Nike’s Past Issues

Nike is not new to this type of scandal. In the last couple of years, Nike has
committed numerous cultural gaffes, offending various segments of the global
population. These incidents have created significant negative publicity and
caused harm to Nike’s reputation, since apologies become weaker the more
frequently they are given.
In June of 2011, Nike released a T-shirt line with phrases such as ‘‘Dope,’’
‘‘Get High,’’ and ‘‘Ride Pipe’’ written across the front (see Appendix 1).
These expressions are traditionally associated with drug use or the act of sex.
One T-shirt displayed a medicine bottle with the word ‘‘DOPE’’ with
skateboards and snowboards spilling out of the bottle instead of drugs. The
issue in this case, according to then-Boston Mayor Thomas Menino, was the
promotion of drug use by a major corporation whose main target market is
 Appropriating the Samoan Culture 63
the younger generation (Brettman, 2011). Despite the backlash, the shirts
were not pulled and Nike continued to sell them through the entirety of
the campaign.
In March of 2012, Nike launched the SB Dunk Low Black and Tan snea-
kers. Many people are familiar with the alcoholic beverage of the same name.
Traditionally, a darker beer, usually Guinness, is mixed with a lighter beer.
However, the name Black and Tan also refers to a darker period of history
for the people of Ireland. Black and Tan was also the name given to a British
military group that was sent to Ireland to quell the Irish rebellion against the
British in the 1920s. The Black and Tan regiment was the cause of many
civilian deaths. Black and Tan, or Tan, is still used in Ireland as a derogatory
term for the British. It has been said that the use of Black and Tan for the
sneakers is equivalent to naming them ‘‘Taliban’’ or ‘‘Nazi.’’ Nike was slow to
respond to criticism, but eventually a representative for Nike apologized,
stating that the company meant no offense. However, the name remained and
the shoe was not pulled from stock (Misener, 2012).
After the London Summer Olympics in the summer of 2012, Nike released
a shirt with the words ‘‘Gold Digging’’ and the signature Nike check mark (see
Appendix 2) to honor the 46 gold medals won by the U.S. women. In recent
years, gold digging has come to refer to women who date wealthy men only for
their money. The T-shirt caused additional tension because it was only
available in women’s sizes. While Nike never apologized, it did issue the
following statement:

Nike has consistently supported female athletes and the position they
enjoy as positive role models. The T-shirt uses a phrase in an ironic way
that is relevant given it was released just as the world focused on the success
of female athletes.
(Nazworth, 2012)

In contrast, Nike was quick to act in April 2013. Following the tragic attacks at
the Boston Marathon, Nike immediately pulled its Boston Massacre T-shirt
from the shelves. The design on the T-shirt referred to a four-game sweep of
the Red Sox by the Yankees in 1978. The shirt is blue and white, Yankee
colors, and has the words ‘‘Boston Massacre’’ with bloodstains on the letters
(CNN Wires Staff, 2013).

The Source of the Problem

On July 30, 2013, Nike Tight of the Moment announced the release of its
new Pro Tattoo Tech Tights on its blog. The company posted that the new
tights were inspired by the tattoos of the Fijian, Samoan, and New Zealand
people. The tights were black with white lines that created the image of tat-
toos, resembling the tattoos of the indigenous people of Fiji, Samoa, and New
Zealand (Ehrbar, 2013).
64 Appropriating the Samoan Culture
Immediately, the public responded. Comments posted just hours after
the announcement of the new tight design lamented Nike’s cultural faux pas
in its choice to use the tattoos of Fijian, Samoan, and New Zealand people on
its apparel. On August 2, John Masina initiated a petition on Change.org
asking Nike to cease production of its Pro Tattoo Tech Tights. Change.org
is a petition platform providing a vehicle through which individuals can
come together and campaign for change. Mr. Masina referenced the United
Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in support of his
claim (Masina, 2013).

What is the Pe’a?

The pe’a is a traditional tattoo that covers the body from the waist to the knees.
The tatau process for the pe’a is extremely painful and is done using handmade
instruments that are made of bone and wood and other natural materials. In
Samoan custom, a pe’a is only done in the traditional way. They do not use
any Western utensils or practices. The family members of the person getting
the tattoo attend the ceremony to provide support during the painful process,
but stand at a distance from the ceremony (Pacific Islanders in Communi-
cations, n.d.).
The pe’a is for males only. It is a rite of passage and a symbol of courage. It is
also seen as a commitment to culture and traditions. In Polynesia, the origins of
the tattoo are varied. Samoans believe that the Fijians are the originators of the
tatau, the Fijians credit the Samoans, and the Maori of New Zealand think it
comes from the underworld (DeMello, 2007).
The pe’a designs are done in black ink. The tattoo starts on the back and
finishes on the belly button. Overall, the design is symmetrical, comprised
primarily of straight lines and larger blocks. The larger blocks are tra-
ditionally found on the legs. This traditional tattoo is not something
entered into lightly. It is a long, painful process. It can take several weeks to
complete the pe’a, and the skin could take up to a year to completely heal
(see Appendix 3).
In addition to abusing the symbolism behind the pe’a, Nike’s use of the
pe’a design on the clothing line also blatantly affronted gender norms within
the Samoan culture. As previously mentioned, the pe’a was only given to
men. Women have their own version, which is called the malu, and consists
of a much simpler design. By using the pe’a on women’s sheer leggings and
giving the impression that a woman is wearing the pe’a tattoo on her body,
Nike co-opted the rite of passage and commitment to cultural tradition
symbolized by the practice of receiving the pe’a. New Zealand Parliament
member Su’a William Sio, who received his pe’a in 1988 stated, ‘‘It’s dis-
turbing. This treasure is held dear to the Samoan community. The patterns
have a spiritual meaning that come from one’s family and ancestors. This just
cheapens and belittles all of that. It’s a total disregard of cultural protocol.’’
(The Curatorial, 2013).
 Appropriating the Samoan Culture 65

The Public’s Response to Nike’s Mistake

As a result of Nike using traditional, indigenous pe’a patterns that symbolize
the commitment to the cultural tradition and values, several groups vocalized
their disapproval of the clothing line and Nike’s cultural insensitivity. The
clothing line was offensive due to its use of indigenous cultural values and
gender norms as fashion statements.
A flurry of articles and editorials emerged in countries with large Samoan
populations. ‘‘To the outside world it’s just a design. But to my Polynesian
people, it’s sacred,’’ one individual wrote in the Otago Daily Times (Radford,
2013). Another commented on the Nike blog, ‘‘Every one of those curves,
lines, and details has meaning. They signify our beliefs, our ancestry, our
history. It is sad to have these things exploited and diluted’’ (Ehrbar, 2013). On
Facebook and Twitter, the public demanded that Nike recall the product and
pull all stock.
Only three days after the soft launch of the leggings, the petition to have
the designs removed from the product line was authored on Change.org.
Within four weeks of the announcement of the clothing line, roughly 1,000
individuals had supported the movement.
As stated by the Change.org petition, Nike’s actions violate Article 31 of
the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
(UNDRIP), which states:

1 Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and

develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and tra-
ditional cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their
sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic
resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna
and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional
games and visual and performing arts. They also have the right to
maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property
over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional
cultural expressions.
2 In conjunction with indigenous peoples, States shall take effective
measures to recognize and protect the exercise of these rights.
(Wiessner, 2013)

According to the UNDRIP, subtle but sustained political and societal actions
have ‘‘pushed indigenous peoples and their cultures to the brink of extinc-
tion.’’ Indigenous people have reclaimed their rights and identities as con-
tributors to the cultural diversity on this planet, most notably, in the formation
of the UNDRIP in 2007 (Wiessner, 2013).
In response to the Change.org petition, one Samoan Nike customer found
‘‘Nike’s blatant disrespect and profit over [the Samoan culture] shameless and
irreverent.’’ The individual went on to write ‘‘the tatau is thousands of years
66 Appropriating the Samoan Culture
old with a tradition of honor’’ and that ‘‘Nike has reduced it to $80 Spanx’’
(Notte, 2013) (see Appendix 4).

Nike’s Response
Immediately after the launch of the new Nike Pro Tattoo Tech tights, Wilson
and her team knew the corporation had committed a significant cultural error.
Not only had Nike produced pants that were directly inspired by the Samoan
pe’a pattern, but it was also using the design, which carried deep masculine
significance, on women’s clothing.
On August 14, 2013, only one week following the official launch of the
product, Nike pulled the product from their shelves, eliminated online sales,
and released the following apology:

The Nike Tattoo Tech Tights were inspired by tattoo graphics. We

apologize to anyone who views this design as insensitive to any specific
culture. No offense was intended. The tights were of a limited run and no
additional tights will be sold [see Appendix 4].
(Notte, 2013)

Though Nike rapidly dealt with this error, those invested were left without a
proper explanation or steps as to how Nike would ensure their cultural sen-
sitivity would improve. In the case of the Pro Tech Tights, stakeholders
include members of the Indigenous People of the Pacific, New Zealand, and
Australian Parliament members, athletes around the world, Nike customers,
suppliers, distributers, Nike, Inc., and Nike’s shareholders.

Cases of Cultural Insensitivity at Nike’s Competitors

Nike is not alone in making poor, culturally insensitive decisions. In late 2011,
Puma launched a shoe that provoked sharp criticism from Emirati nationals
(George, 2011). The limited edition shoes were released to mark the 40th
U.A.E. National Day, and bore colors that closely resembled those of the U.A.E.
national flag. Puma was blamed for their lack of cultural sensitivity. U.A.E.
consumers found great offense in the colors of their flag represented on a product
worn on an individual’s feet. Upon hearing of the backlash, Puma ordered the
removal of the shoes and released an apology to their customers.
In June of 2012, Adidas announced release of a line of sneakers, the JS
Roundhouse Mid, a high-top lace-up with a Velcro strap across the middle
with a ‘‘handcuff’’ that attached to the customers’ ankles. A public outcry
ensued immediately following the announcement of the new product.
Thousands in the blogosphere took ‘‘issue with the ankle shackle, interpreting
it as a historical symbol of African slavery’’ (The Huffington Post, 2012). Though
Adidas initially rebuffed the comments, the athletic apparel conglomerate
canceled plans to sell the shoe and apologized for any offense taken.
 Appropriating the Samoan Culture 67

Next Steps
Though Nike moved quickly to respond to the public outcry, and had recalled
the Pro Tech Tights, Laurissa Wilson must now assess how the egregious error
was made, and ensure that Nike takes proper steps to understand their cus-
tomer base while maintaining a high level of cultural sensitivity. Recognizing
that the company has made several cultural mistakes in the recent past, Wilson
must overhaul the process through which Nike products are developed with
respect to cultural identities.

Case Questions:
1 How do the concepts of individualism and collectivism pertain to Nike
and the Indigenous People of the Pacific?
2 Why were the indigenous people of Fiji, Samoa, and New Zealand
offended? What identity issues pertain to the Nike Tech Tights scenario?
3 The launch of the Nike Tattoo Tech Tights offended people from various
geographic regions. Explain why they experienced similar reactions.
4 Was it enough to acknowledge that the tights were ‘‘inspired by tattoo
graphics,’’ or should the company have communicated the use of the
design more directly? What would Nike have accomplished by directly
communicating their use of the design?
5 How can Nike improve their product-vetting process to reveal the poten-
tial for errors caused by cultural insensitivity? (List changes in how they
perceive both cultures and internal process.)
6 Should a company the size of Nike be concerned with being culturally
sensitive even if the negative implications do not affect their bottom
line?

Appendix 1
See URL for news story and image: www.foxsports.com/other/story/nike-t-
shirt-slogans-spark-controversy-062311.

Appendix 2
See URL for news story and image: www.forbes.com/sites/lancemadden/
2012/08/17/i-aint-sayin-shes-a-gold-digger-but-nike-is/#10d5c80d2b5f.

Appendix 3
See URL for complete news story and image (Pacific Islanders in Com-
munications, n.d.): www.pbs.org/skinstories/history/.