Lacoste Replace Their Iconic Crocodile Logo With Endangered Species, And People Are Not Happy About It
Few logos are recognized as wide as the iconic Lacoste crocodile, but the clothing company decided to change it. Temporarily. The French retailer has released a limited collection of white polo shirts, which, instead of the iconic crocodile, feature 10 endangered species. And even though the entire lineup has already been sold out, people are having mixed emotions about the campaign.
Program Save Our Species is a collaboration between Lacoste and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). As part of it, the clothing brand unveiled an exclusive lineup of t-shirts during the Paris Fashion Week. The collection consists of only 1,775 items that show 10 endangered species instead of its original logo. The number of shirts produced for each series corresponds to the remaining quantity of the species left in nature. These include the Vaquita dolphin, Burmese roofed turtle, Northern sportive lemur, Javan rhino, Cao Vit gibbon, Kakapo parrot, California condor, the Saola, Sumatran tiger, and the Anegada ground iguana.
Despite its effort to raise awareness about these animals, some people call out Lacoste for ‘greenwashing.’ The term implies that the company claims it does wonders for the environment when in reality it is actually only interested in promoting itself. Commenters argue that if Lacoste was serious, it would make changes in production or take other critical actions. Scroll down to check out how everything unfolded and let us know in the comments if you think this campaign is just a dirty marketing trick.
More info: lacoste.com (h/t demilked)
Lacoste is famous for its iconic crocodile
But for this year’s Paris Fashion Week, the brand has redesigned it
The iconic crocodile was replaced with 10 threatened animal species
As part of Save Our Species campaign, Lacoste aims to raise awareness about the state of biodiversity, donating the proceeds to the International Union for Conservation of Nature
The endangered animals include the Vaquita dolphin, Burmese roofed turtle, Northern sportive lemur, and others
The collection consists of only 1,775 items
The number of shirts produced for each series corresponds to the remaining quantity of the species left in nature
This lineup made headlines all over the internet, and it’s already sold out
But some people think the company claims it does wonders for the environment when in reality it is actually only interested in promoting itself
They’re calling Lacoste for being hypocrites
While others applauded the campaign
Wrong title for the subject over all. Lacoste did not replace their logo because it is still on the tag, and the company isn't running this line of shirts for that long which is sad. pure marketing stunt.
Unfortunately and as usual, this Bored Panda Staff writer has left pertinent information out, siding this article toward her/his own prejudice. The truth is Lacoste worked with IUCN who are the ones that work with every group and scientist in the world working to help all animals on the planet in ways to save their habitats and species themselves. They are the ones that decide the status (ie; endangered etc...) of each animal. Their information is vital. Lacoste gave every penny to them and though I am not personally aware of Lacoste's history of environmental or human abuses or not, I do know for a fact that doing whatever we can to bring awareness to these sentient beings is also vital. You can also say celebrities "use" their status to make important issues brought to the forefront as personal advertising but why be so pessimistic? The question would be what are we as individuals doing to help this planet and it's residents? I applaud you Lacoste. Thank you!
There's something about the whole "create awareness" movement which doesn't close the loop - creating awareness by itself is counter-productive, unless said awareness is accompanied by sustained behavioral change. In this case, if the campaign caused more people to change their behaviours resulting in net greater impact on conservation efforts, then the campaign succeeded. If it cost the environment more than the benefit from behaviour change , then all the brand has done is create more consumerism. In this case, maybe there is another campaign which could have done more than this one.
Load More Replies...
It seems like most people commenting on social media are Lacoste intolerant.
Load More Replies...
Well, I guess if they donated all the money... what harm is done? Also, believe it or not some people are actually unaware of the mass amount of species on the endangered list or going to be on the list soon......if this reached ONE new person and changed even ONE persons responsibility to nature I would say 100% worth it. Even if it is a stunt for more revenue, at least they chose a noteworthy one.
Wrong title for the subject over all. Lacoste did not replace their logo because it is still on the tag, and the company isn't running this line of shirts for that long which is sad. pure marketing stunt.
Unfortunately and as usual, this Bored Panda Staff writer has left pertinent information out, siding this article toward her/his own prejudice. The truth is Lacoste worked with IUCN who are the ones that work with every group and scientist in the world working to help all animals on the planet in ways to save their habitats and species themselves. They are the ones that decide the status (ie; endangered etc...) of each animal. Their information is vital. Lacoste gave every penny to them and though I am not personally aware of Lacoste's history of environmental or human abuses or not, I do know for a fact that doing whatever we can to bring awareness to these sentient beings is also vital. You can also say celebrities "use" their status to make important issues brought to the forefront as personal advertising but why be so pessimistic? The question would be what are we as individuals doing to help this planet and it's residents? I applaud you Lacoste. Thank you!
There's something about the whole "create awareness" movement which doesn't close the loop - creating awareness by itself is counter-productive, unless said awareness is accompanied by sustained behavioral change. In this case, if the campaign caused more people to change their behaviours resulting in net greater impact on conservation efforts, then the campaign succeeded. If it cost the environment more than the benefit from behaviour change , then all the brand has done is create more consumerism. In this case, maybe there is another campaign which could have done more than this one.
Load More Replies... It seems like most people commenting on social media are Lacoste intolerant.
Load More Replies... Well, I guess if they donated all the money... what harm is done? Also, believe it or not some people are actually unaware of the mass amount of species on the endangered list or going to be on the list soon......if this reached ONE new person and changed even ONE persons responsibility to nature I would say 100% worth it. Even if it is a stunt for more revenue, at least they chose a noteworthy one.
65
13