Controversial Windows
I don’t make my students shy away from doing displays that are provocative or controversial. I say push the boundaries! But when I came across this article in the Daily Mail, on the windows skin-care retailer LUSH did, I wondered if they crossed the line?
Although I do not find what they did offensive, it does turn my stomach a bit and does not make me want to go in their store. Which completely defeats the purpose of visual merchandising!
I applaud their efforts to bring animal cruelty in the cosmetic industry to the public’s attention, but when I hear the word LUSH and think of skin-care, I envision beauty and goodness.
What do you think? I’m interested to hear your thoughts on this.
Here are a few pictures from the full article, although read the article so the photos are not taken out of context.
You say that this display “completely defeats the purpose of visual merchandising!” But I disagree. It’s great branding for Lush. Essentially what they’re saying is that animal testing is cruel, inhumane, and most of all, Lush doesn’t do it. If you shop other places than Lush, the window says, you could be indirectly participating in this.
I’ll bet sales for that store dipped that day, but the publicity gained them more loyal customers for months to come.
Awesome and intriguing post as usual, Arcadia!