Here's how a fashion brand shamelessly cashes in on a dead artist's legacy while giving nothing back

[editor]

Got this press release. Asked if there was a charitable angle to any of it. There wasn't.

"EXCLUSIVE LAUNCH: LABRUM LONDON X TUPAC SHAKUR AT BRIXTON VILLAGE

Tupac Shakur is an iconic figure who fearlessly challenged oppressive systems, championed his community, and became a voice for the voiceless. His artistry and powerful messages inspired countless individuals to believe in the strength of their dreams without limitations. Similarly, LABRUM is a brand committed to being a platform, champion, and voice for those who yearn to express themselves freely and share their messages. The brand's philosophy revolves around producing authentic and thought-provoking garments that embody freedom of expression."

 

[editor]

More guff:

"Foday Dumbuya, founder and creative director of LABRUM, said, "I am very honoured to partner with the Shakur Estate, to bring this extraordinary collaboration to life. The partnership is not just about fashion; it's a celebration of the human spirit, resilience, and the ability to effect change. Together, we aim to ignite a movement that encourages everyone to believe in their ability to make a lasting, positive difference. I hope that the collection will inspire individuals to embrace their unique voices and make a positive impact in their lives and the world around them."

 

[Orang Utan]

If the Shakur estate are happy with it, what’s the issue?

 

[editor]

If the Shakur estate are happy with it, what’s the issue?

Which bit of this do you think is actually true and what 'movement' do you think this cash-in brand is going to ignite and what good will it do?

"Together, we aim to ignite a movement that encourages everyone to believe in their ability to make a lasting, positive difference."

And of course the Shakur estate are happy with it. They're getting money for nothing but that doesn't stop it being a sickening cash in.

 

[Orang Utan]

Which bit of this do you think is actually true and what 'movement' do you think this cash-in brand is going to ignite and what good will it do?

"Together, we aim to ignite a movement that encourages everyone to believe in their ability to make a lasting, positive difference."

And of course the Shakur estate are happy with it. They're getting money for nothing but that doesn't stop it being a sickening cash in.

Don’t really give a shit. It’s just bullshit fashion marketing. And you’re giving them free advertising!
I don’t see what’s particularly sickening about this instance. There’s always been knock offs of images of cultural icons on sale everywhere with your Bob Marleys and Che Guavaras

 

[Silas Loom]

The people who are paying other people to send press releases to the editor of Urban75 need to keep a closer eye on those people and their media lists.

 

[JimW]

Pablum more like.

 

[editor]

And you’re giving them free advertising!

This is the most piss weak, lamest comeback of them all. As if they're likely to generate a single sale because of a thread here.

 

[Orang Utan]

This is the most piss weak, lamest comeback of them all. As if they're likely to generate a single sale because of a thread here.

I wasn’t aware of them until you told us about them!
Just another lame fashion brand, hardly worthy of the free publicity

 

[editor]

I wasn’t aware of them until you told us about them!
Just another lame fashion brand, hardly worthy of the free publicity

I see you're still clinging to the outdated and now rather quaint notion that 'all publicity is good publicity.' It's not.

Negative PR: Not All Publicity is Good Publicity [With Examples]

Avoid the impact of negative PR. Read our blog for examples of companies that faced backlash and learn how to turn it into an opportunity for growth.

prlab.co

Is all publicity good publicity?

Protein World has demonstrated that controversial adverts can get people talking about your business. But can they also damage your brand?

www.theguardian.com

 

[Orang Utan]

I see you're still clinging to the outdated and now rather quaint notion that 'all publicity is good publicity.' It's not.

Negative PR: Not All Publicity is Good Publicity [With Examples]

Avoid the impact of negative PR. Read our blog for examples of companies that faced backlash and learn how to turn it into an opportunity for growth.

prlab.co

Is all publicity good publicity?

Protein World has demonstrated that controversial adverts can get people talking about your business. But can they also damage your brand?

www.theguardian.com

no, I’m just criticising your ignorant Pearl-clutching just cos you mistakenly got a rubbish press release aimed at a different demographic to you

 

[editor]

no, I’m just criticising your ignorant Pearl-clutching just cos you mistakenly got a rubbish press release aimed at a different demographic to you

'Pearl clutching'? Seriously, what the fuck are you on about? I'm just calling out corporate cash-in bullshit, something this site has done - literally - from day one.

You've changed.

 

[Orang Utan]

It just seems like pissing in the wind.
I’ve changed? Of course I have.
Though I still have the same contempt for corporate cash-in bullshit as you rightly call it.

 

[salem]

It's sounds like a pretty naff cash in, I was curious to see what the Shakur Estate actually does and who the benefactors are - perhaps giving grants or something but seems it's mired in shadiness since his mother died - Tupac’s Sister Says Trustee Still Has ‘Disregard For Transparency’ . I think the beneficiary is supposed to be this though which seems positive - Tupac Amaru Shakur Foundation - tupacshakurfoundation.org

The actual concept is probably on a par with H&M Nirvana shirts in my meh opinion.

 

[tim]

I hope the Editor has measures in place to save this site from blatant exploitation by his Estate once he's pushing up the daffodils.

 

[editor]

I hope the Editor has measures in place to save this site from blatant exploitation by his Estate once he's pushing up the daffodils.

I think the window for lucrative commercial exploitation of this site passed many years ago and I was happy to turn down every offer.

That said, I have instructed my family to make a series of premium urban75 glowing rave underpants available after my demise.

 

[High Voltage]

I have instructed my family to make a series of premium urban75 glowing rave underpants available after my demise.

Whilst in no way wishing to accelerate the arrival of said sad event... ummm... Medium please and if choice of colour is available, probably blue, second choice red

 

[andysays]

Don’t really give a shit. It’s just bullshit fashion marketing. And you’re giving them free advertising!
I don’t see what’s particularly sickening about this instance. There’s always been knock offs of images of cultural icons on sale everywhere with your Bob Marleys and Che Guavaras

I don't give much of a fuck about this case*, but even I can see the difference between knock off ie unlicensed products featuring dead icons and those explicitly licensed by their estate.

* enough of a fuck to read and even comment on the thread though, obvs...

 

[editor]

I'll always take the piss out of crass, exploitative marketing, whether it comes from the 'estate' or just chancers.