Subscribe to The Frayed Edge by Sarah Kent, a weekly newsletter on how to build a cleaner, fairer fashion system.
Welcome back and well done for surviving a historic marathon of designer debuts to all who engaged, whether in person or virtually.
This week, we’re taking a look at whether fashion has really delivered on its great reset, not just aesthetically, but culturally and structurally as well. Spoiler alert: news broke this week that Milanese prosecutors are seeking to take yet another luxury brand to task for links to labour exploitation, so there’s definitely still work to be done.
Meanwhile, off runway, the fashion drama in France has focused on Shein’s plans to open its first physical stores in the country (quelle horreuer, the local industry exclaims). And finally, we tackle the question I’m sure you’ve all been asking since Taylor Swift dropped her latest album last week: with a love song named after man-made opals, will the singer affect the lab-grown vs mined stone debate?
As always, send me thoughts, feedback, tips and questions.
À la Mode
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose, as they say in Paris, where fashion has been trying hard to do all the things over the last two weeks.
As the excitement dies down from a blockbuster season of debuts, it sort of feels that way.
I confess, I was not in Paris myself this year, so my views are filtered through the lenses (both literal and metaphorical) of others. But as Angelo Flaccavento said in his season wrap for BoF, “amid the drama of designers swapping houses with each other, change itself was somewhat elusive.”
Of course, I’m not just talking about the clothes — I know that’s not why you’re here.
This moment was meant to be fashion’s great reset — aesthetically of course, but also commercially, culturally and ethically. But was it all just one big, glamorous distraction?
In Milan, industry leaders sought to shrug off the shadow of sweatshop scandals that have plagued efforts to convince shoppers that it really is worth dropping $10,000 on a handbag these days. Despite allegations to the contrary, the official luxury narrative remains that labour exploitation is not actually a high-end problem and could pesky journalists please stop being such a drag and harping on about the odd outlier scandal. It’s bad for business.
This week, Tod’s became the latest luxury label to face allegations of such “isolated” links to labour exploitation in its Italian supply chains. Awks. (The Italian footwear brand contests the claims and staged an impromptu press briefing on Friday to defend itself, and the wider industry’s honour. More on this later).
Then there was the question of what message brands were sending down the runway. There is no shortage of things to comment on at the moment, but fashion writ large seems to be in a retreat from political engagement. We’re back to fantasy and escapism, which in fairness is often where fashion thrives, but this season, a question that seemed to keep cropping up was “for whom?”
The models are skinnier than ever (thank you Ozempic). Clothes, largely designed by the same roster of men who have dominated the industry for years, were oftentimes beautiful, but not necessarily desirable to their core target demographic: women.
As Financial Times fashion editor Elizabeth Paton deadpanned in her show roundup this week, at a time when the industry is seeking to stem declining sales and restore cultural relevance, “more probing could probably be done on whether women really want to look constrained, silenced or naked when spending thousands of dollars on luxury goods.” Amen.
Fashion is in a funny state. It grew very, very fast and it kind of hit a ceiling. Now fashion needs to rethink its own model. Everything cannot be done by communication, image, putting something on a celebrity. Luxury is not enough any more.
— Chanel creative director Matthieu Blazy
Off Runway
Meanwhile, there’s been some big drama playing out off the catwalks, too.
French fashion is up in arms over plans by the industry’s favourite arch-nemesis Shein to open its first permanent physical stores in the country.
A petition to block the move has racked up hundreds of thousands of signatures, and luxury department store Galeries Lafayette has raised vigorous objections to the idea that Shein shops could appear in regional outposts that still bear its name after being sold off in 2021. The financing for the acquisition of a Paris-based store is under threat after plans emerged for it to house the ultra-fast-fashion giant.
The anti-Shein argument is essentially a protectionist one, dressed up in ethics and with a healthy dose of fashion snobbery dusted over the top.
To be sure, there’s plenty of fair criticism to be levelled against the industry’s bête noire du jour. Over the last few months, the company’s been hit by a string of European fines for alleged data breaches, fake discounts and greenwashing. And while its disruptive digitally driven model of “on demand” fashion has proved wildly successful financially and helped it gobble up market share from less agile incumbents, it’s also environmentally ruinous.
Despite corporate pledges to curb its impact and tighten up internal controls, the company’s planet-warming emissions are chart topping (literally, they’re the worst in the business), its opaque supply chains are riddled with allegations of labour exploitation and its relentless churn of new items has helped push fashion into a new era of hyper consumption.
Shein’s counter: we’re just giving the people what they want.
“Customers in France show a growing appetite for physical touchpoints with our brand,” the company said in a statement, adding that driving more footfall to department stores where its shops are located will also help the wider retail ecosystem.
Wait, what about France’s fast fashion ban?
Good question. Earlier this year, it did look like the country was going to introduce some pretty radical regulation that aimed at curbing the influence of companies like Shein and e-commerce marketplace Temu. Proposed measures included an advertising ban and “sin tax” style penalties on polluting products. The bill was due for final discussion and sign off this fall, but with the French government currently in disarray, its fate is somewhat unclear.
Meanwhile, it seems Shein’s view is that French consumers do not share the same qualms as the country’s political and fashion elites and that if it builds the stores, the shoppers will come.
Can’t Stop, Won’t Stop or Not a Problem?
Let’s go back for a minute to luxury’s big, bad Italian sweatshop problem. Despite the industry’s best efforts to minimise the issues, they just won’t seem to go away.
Tod’s is now the sixth brand to get caught up in investigations linking some of the sector’s most elite players to labour exploitation. Dior, Loro Piana, Valentino and Armani have all come under scrutiny from prosecutors in Milan, who said they connected the companies to illegal factories where workers allegedly toiled long hours for meagre wages to manufacture products that sell for thousands of dollars.
And while luxury says such cases are an exception — generally the fault of unscrupulous suppliers who outsource production without the permission or knowledge of the brands — prosecutors say they are part of a consolidated system of production fashion brands have come to rely on that exploits workers and puts them in danger.
A shadow economy of illegal subcontractors that run on labour exploitation have effectively “doped the market,” undercutting legitimate players, they said in court documents laying out their case against Tod’s. At the core of the matter is the allegation that brands effectively turn a blind eye to such problems in order to maximise profits.
Fashion has become a joke. It’s all about money. The major companies of fashion, they’re like kids playing soccer, just running after the ball.
— Designer Yohji Yamamoto
Some Things to Know About The Tod’s Case
- Milanese prosecutors want to put the brand under judicial supervision. They’re not suggesting Tod’s is responsible for labour abuses at its suppliers, but they do allege it “culpably failed” to put adequate processes in place to ensure they didn’t take place.
- Workers at two Tod’s suppliers earned less than €5 ($5.78) an hour sewing on leather uppers and providing other footwear manufacturing services, according to the investigation. Loro Piana products were also found in one of the factories. (Loro Piana said the incident was the result of undisclosed and unauthorised subcontracting, identified by its own audits before the brand was placed under court administration in July. It has terminated all relationships with affected suppliers).
- Tod’s denies the allegations. The company said it was “in compliance with all applicable laws” and that it carries out “regular and thorough checks” on the workshops it employs.
- This one’s going to the Supreme Court over a jurisdictional dispute, after a Milan court said the issue should be handled in central Italy’s Marche region, where Tod’s is based. A hearing is scheduled for Nov. 19.
The Intrigue
Tod’s chair Diego Delle Valle hosted an impromptu press briefing on Friday afternoon to address what he described as “carelessly” framed allegations that risk doing serious damage to both the brand and the wider Italian luxury sector.
“Before saying such serious things, you need to really have your facts straight,” Delle Valle told an intimate gathering of the media without directly addressing the allegations brought against the company. (Tod’s says it was only made aware of the issues last Wednesday and is still reviewing the documents).
“Monitor us as thoroughly as possible, by all means — but do it carefully, not carelessly,” Delle Valle said, questioning the motivations driving the cases against the industry. “I can’t help feeling sometimes that the use of certain tools might be driven by a need for publicity — which, in this case, is really hurting us.”
The public clap back is the most direct response from any brand caught up in the supply chain scandal so far. It echoes the defense mounted by the industry during Milan fashion week, where the reputational damage done by negative coverage of the “Made in Italy” label emerged as a serious sore point.
“We can’t treat ‘Made in Italy’ as something insignificant. It represents one of our country’s great strengths and one of the most competitive marks of excellence in the world,” Delle Valle said. “We need to speak up and say that you’re causing us serious problems.”
Meanwhile, he argued that the regulatory framework also needs to change because companies can’t be expected to oversee all the layers of subcontracting in their supply chains.
“We’re not the financial police,” he said. “That’s exactly why we need to look at the law in detail and rethink how certain rules are written, because the way things stand now, they just don’t work.”
The Bottom Line: Until relatively recently, the path of European regulation would challenge this thinking. But recent moves to roll back due diligence legislation in Brussels are more reflective of such views.
Now the Sky Is Opalite
When Taylor Swift got engaged a few months ago, she had the diamond industry clapping its hands with glee.
Her fiancé (the American footballer Travis Kelce for those of you who have failed to keep even the most tentative of fingers on the current pop culture pulse) bought her an absolutely massive rock. It was vintage, mined from the earth, and positioned by the industry as a big thumbed nose at the lab-grown sector, which has emerged as a dangerous challenger.
Now that TayTay’s new album is out, the gem industry may be feeling less confident though.
One of its boppiest tracks is called Opalite, a reference to man-made opals and a metaphor in the song for the importance of making your own happiness in life.
“Often times in life we have to make our own happiness
“I really loved the idea that the sort of man-made gemstone jewel, is also a metaphor for your own choosing. Choosing your own path to happiness making it yourself, it was manmade, it didn’t just happen to you. You had to fight for it, you had to work for it, you had to earn it,” Swift told a UK radio station.
Chalk one up for the lab-grown market.
Come on, it’s not that deep.
I mean, sure. The album has emerged to mixed reviews and controversy over whether or not the song is a dig at one of Kelce’s exes has dominated the cultural conversation about it.
But, the album also sold 2.7 million copies in the US on its first day, breaking Swift’s previous record for most sales in a week in 24 hours. On top of that, the popstar’s fans are notorious for their willingness to hunt for hidden meanings in her songs.
The bottom line: However you feel about Taylor Swift — whether it’s love, hate or indifference — that woman has clout and influence.
WHAT ELSE YOU NEED TO KNOW THIS WEEK:
- Regulation Watch: European parliamentarians have agreed a deal to further water down landmark regulation that would make big fashion brands more accountable for environmental and labour abuses in their supply chains. [The Business of Fashion]
- Old Clothes, New Ills: Reports of lung disease, skin conditions and even cancer are rising in Panipat, India, which recycles 1 million tonnes of textile waste a year. [The Business of Fashion]
- Fossil Fuel Facials: In an excerpt from her forthcoming book, Arabelle Sicardi outlines the true cost of the beauty industry’s environmental impact, its health implications and how to fix it. [The Business of Fashion]
- Vogue’s New, Old Fur Ban: Publisher Condé Nast has gone public with a long-standing policy prohibiting the use of new animal fur in most editorial and advertising content. [The Business of Fashion]
- Green Boom: Green stocks are beating the world’s biggest trades, even gold, as investors respond to soaring demand for renewables needed to power the boom in artificial intelligence. [Bloomberg]
