The Controversy Of Nike’S Ad “Believe In Something” With Colin Kaepernick

At first glance we see a close-up on a man’s face. He’s stare is intense and he seems to be looking forward. Due to his dark complexion and his afro-textured hair we can assume his ethnicity. We notice that he is untouched and unfiltered. The image is black and white, with the words “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything” standing out in the middle of the image, while “Just do It. ” is written below it, next to the Swoosh logo. The Swoosh logo along with the iconic slogan, indicate that this is a Nike advertisement, which, as a brand, is related to athleticism, courage, honor, victory, teamwork, and all other aspects correlated with sports. The fact that the man is looking forward symbolizes sincerity and determination, as we imagine that he is focused on his goal. His unfiltered face and powerful expression, combined with the black and white pallet of the image, gives the feeling that the person is tired but steady.

The linguistic message, “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything”, written in a simplistic fond, promotes persistence, passion, motivation, fearlessness and manages to inspire the viewer of the advertisement, to fight for his ideals. However, to the people aware of the story of the depicted person, this image has an even deeper meaning. To begin with, the man in the picture is Colin Kaepernick, a former San Francisco 49ers quarterback and Nike Athlete-someone that the brand has invested in and publicized for years and who has served as an individual reflection of the brand’s values. Nike has always advocated the idea of commitment, pride, passion, taking a risk and following a path that is true to who you are. Nonetheless, the coded messages do not end there, as the linguistic message is, actually, a reference to his lawsuit against the NFL (National Football League) for allegedly colluding to keep him out of the league over his protest against social injustice and police brutality against black Americans. His controversial actions – sitting or kneeling during the National Anthem before several 2016 NFL games, as a means of protest- turned him into a debatable figure, as he is described both as a person disrespectful of “our country, our flag, our anthem” (referring to the USA) as stated by President Donald Trump (in the Hannity Interview 2017) and as “one of the most inspirational athletes of this generation” (by Gino Fisanotti). Thus, depending on the person’s ethnicity, social class, political stance, personal values and other factors as such, the man appearing on the poster can either serve as a symbol of unpatriotism and disrespect to the country’s heritage and the people who have risked their lives, been injured, or died defending it, or as an example of staying true to one’s beliefs, bravely voicing one’s opinions, demanding equality, justice and pointing the finger to the flaws of modern society.

Although this image doesn’t seem to make the product desirable, meaning Nike’s sports equipment, through offering the spectator “an improved alternative to what he is” as suggested by John Berger in chapter 7 of his book “Ways of Seeing. ”, Nike actually manages to subconsciously get through that message due to their choice of Colin Kaepernick as the face of their campaign, along with the linguistic message. Nike, known for its socially-conscious and inspirational campaigns, targets both those unaware of Keapernick’s story but especially those who support either side of the argument regarding the ex-quarterback’s controversial actions. The ignorant spectator gets a message encoded but clear. The person in the image is apparently brave and willing to risk everything for his ideals, while the spectator is not, he is just ordinary and voiceless. That realization makes him “marginally dissatisfied with his present way of life. ” as stated by John Berger, making him want to “transform himself” in order to attract “envy which will then justify him loving himself. ”. However, Nike’s primary goal was to spark controversy, thus gaining free publicity through viral marketing. And that was achieved by targeting fanatic supporters and haters of Keapernick, who interpreted the meaning of the campaign differently and acted according to their personal beliefs. For them, this advertisement had to do with an issue that touched on American history as well as American values.

The ad provoked backlash from some who believe Keapernick’s protest during the anthem was disrespectful. Some people posted pictures cutting their Nike socks, burning their Nike shoes, and #BoycottNike started trending. However, the company's sales online jumped 31% after the release of the campaign, according to one analysis by digital research firm Edison Trends. In fact there were hundreds of thousands speaking up and supporting Nike- among them famous athletes, such as LeBron James and Serena Williams- while some of them banded together to buy more Nike equipment, such as Nick Cannon, who bought all the Nike socks in his local store and donated them to a homeless shelter. This outcome could be explained by Berger’s quote: “Publicity turns consumption into a substitute for democracy”, as consumers have the illusion that being able to choose from a variety of brands means that they are “free”, although they are actually in a never-ending pursuit of individual happiness through buying and consuming products.

In this case they believe that boycotting or supporting a specific brand, Nike, is actually a way of fighting for their ideals, although in the end, everything is for the company’s benefit. Personally, I believe that this image sends a very strong message, that should be food for thought for all the people that get through their life as passive receivers-afraid or unmotivated to speak their minds. Furthermore, this image served as a reason for me to get informed about the depicted man’s story and take a stand. After gaining knowledge over the subject, seeing this picture actually brings frustration to me, as I remember the hateful comments that he received and, to my personal opinion, the fact that his actions were labeled as “disrespectful” in an attempt to turn a blind eye on problems that plague society.