Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
del.icio.us.
Digg!
furl
google
newsvine
reddit
technorati
Facebook
Yahoo!I have read many letters over the past couple of months by people complaining about American Apparel ads. What you don't hear, however, is that American Apparel is actually a good company. It's sweatshop-free, with all of their products made in America—downtown L.A. to be specific—without outsourcing. Employees are treated fairly with paid time off, healthcare benefits, paid transportation to and from work, company-funded lunches, and free on-site massages. The company tries to be as earth-conscious as possible, installing solar panels on its L.A. factory and using 20 percent organic cotton with plans to boost that to 80 percent in the next couple of years. I am not complaint-free, however, as I find American Apparel's in-store sales personnel quite unhelpful and aloof, at least at the Santa Barbara location.
Ms. Kingsbury [ "Appalling Apparel," Aug. 23], your clothes may not be provocatively advertised, but what impact does their manufacturing have on the environment? Are the people making them being paid living wages and treated in an ethical manner? In the end, when it comes to the "soft porn" ads, I am willing to trade a little T & A for a product that I know is made with care by good people receiving ethical and humane treatment at their job. —Elizabeth Cota
Previous Month
Comments
Discussion Guidelines
It's not the T & A in itself that's offensive to me, it's the tender age of the models. Provocatively dressed barely pubescent girls--what's the message?
mtndriver (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2007 at 9:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
When you all complained about the sexy models. [All of their models are retail employees] AP then put in ugly (but young) models. Is that more politically correct?
SB_HikerBiker (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2007 at 11:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Post a comment