Critics on social platforms and beyond didn’t just see a jeans ad – they saw eugenics-like language and aesthetics connected to white beauty standards and racial superiority. Some even called the wordplay “tone-deaf”, with a few social media users describing it as echoing “Nazi” propaganda or white-supremacist dog whistles.
The controversial American Eagle jeans ad, New York.
In July 2025, American Eagle dropped a new denim campaignstarring American actress Sydney Sweeney with the tagline “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans”.
On the surface, it was a straightforward collection launch. However, because the ad literally plays on the homonym jeans/genes, and features Sydney’s blonde hair and blue eyes alongside a voiceover talking about inherited traits, it quickly became labelled as controversialin the media.
That might sound extreme at first, but in order to understand why this bumped into cultural sensitivities, you have to look at the words and visuals together. In one widely shared clip, Sweeney says, “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair colour, personality and even eye colour. My jeans are blue.” Paired with her features, many people read it as more than just a clever pun.
What keeps this relevant – even many months after the ad launched – is that it shows how people talk about diversity, company messaging and brand language in today’s political climate. In the US, conversations about race and identity are now intense: discussions over diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes continue. Cultural disputes over what counts as acceptable messaging are core in politics, workplaces, schools and the media.
Harbingers’ Weekly Brief
Subscribe to the Harbingers’ Weekly Brief, a newsletter written by the editorial board of Harbingers’ Magazine, the world’s youngest newsroom, delivered to your inbox every Monday morning.
![author_bio]()
![author_bio]()
That means a campaign that mixes race-linked language and imagery can feel less like a harmless pun and more like proof of how these kinds of topics still trigger today’s society.
Besides, it’s a known fact that US president Donald Trump expressed support for Sydney Sweeney, which only added fuel to the fire, since he’s known for making controversial decisions related to race, such as deporting immigrants.
In my opinion, the whole situation was blown way out of proportion. American Eagle simply aimed to recreate Brooke Shields’ 1980 Calvin Klein Jeans ad,featuring a currently relevant actress, who happened to be Sydney Sweeney.
Her blue eyes and blonde hair weren’t the reason she was picked; her popularity was. She played one of the main characters in the hit TV series Euphoria and starred in The White Lotus along with a lot of other productions.
The overtly sexy Brooke Shields ad – which included the line “Do you know what comes between me and my Calvins? Nothing.” – was hugely controversial in its day, not least because the actress was only 15 at the time it was shot.
However, people tend to over-analyse things; hence why they end up finding controversy in everything. There are no reasons to believe American Eagle would be interested in defending white supremacy or taking part in Nazi propaganda, especially given that many people assume the ad was a remake of the Brooke Shields one. However, it is understandable that AE wanted to grab attention by causing controversy, which is a known and working technique.
American Eagle’s official response aimed to assure people that the intent of the commercial was simple and had no hidden meanings, posting on Instagram that it “is and always was about the jeans”, celebrating confidence in denim and telling audiences that “great jeans look good on everyone.”
Sweeney herself has recently spoken about the backlash. She apologised for her silence when the ad launched and said that she opposes “hate and divisiveness”, and that many people assigned labels and motives to her that weren’t true.
Edited by:
© 2026 The Oxford School for the Future