Nike gets into trouble for "blasphemous" sneaker

I can barely see what people are talking about, even after looking up 'Allah' in Arabic. Unless they had someone who could speak Arabic look at it closely during the design process, I don't think anyone would have noticed.

This could very easily just be an anomalous coincidence not all that different from a Jesus on a grilled cheese scenario.

I'm surprised that the professionally offended aren't more worried that the name of their god looks like a drawing of a **** and balls.

I can barely see what people are talking about, even after looking up 'Allah' in Arabic. Unless they had someone who could speak Arabic look at it closely during the design process, I don't think anyone would have noticed.

This could very easily just be an anomalous coincidence not all that different from a Jesus on a grilled cheese scenario.

Great news! This petition garnering attention worldwide was started right here in the UK. By an individual named Saiqa Noreen.

Not the first of its kind, either. Marks and Spencer is in the firing line over "Allah" embossed toilet paper too.

https://metro.co.uk/2019/01/22/muslims-call-boycott-ms-toilet-tissue-allah-symbol-8374684/

You'd almost think they were actively on the lookout for something to complain about wouldn't you?

i don't see it either but if we worked for Nike we would be paid to scrutinise the product and design from every angle. we'd also have high-tech software to examine the design for us. and we'd ask ourselves ridiculous questions that normal people wouldn't do, like 'what does this read upside down?'. and 'does it read differently once put into production?', etc. etc.

i mean, i don't think Nike tried to put 'Allah' into the design. i just wouldn't put it past them to see the possibility, ignore it, then someone on the marketing team plant the idea somewhere to get people talking about it. i wouldn't even know this shoe existed unless there was controversy around it.

i don't see it either but if we worked for Nike we would be paid to scrutinise the product and design from every angle. we'd also have high-tech software to examine the design for us. and we'd ask ourselves ridiculous questions that normal people wouldn't do, like 'what does this read upside down?'. and 'does it read differently once put into production?', etc. etc.

i mean, i don't think Nike tried to put 'Allah' into the design. i just wouldn't put it past them to see the possibility, ignore it, then someone on the marketing team plant the idea somewhere to get people talking about it. i wouldn't even know this shoe existed unless there was controversy around it.

You're over thinking this. The shoe has some squiggles that kinda look like the Arabic for "Allah" when viewed at a certain angle, but I'm not convinced anyone at Nike saw this and thought it would make a good publicity stunt. Most likely it was just a coincidence that someone picked up on, spread around the internet, and now here we are. And it really is a very weak resemblance.

Also, there are over a billion Muslims in the world and I don't think Nike would risk offending that many customers just to give a single shoe some (potentially bad) publicity.

because i’m thinking about how products actually get made and who is making them, i.e. design experts and marketing experts in a multi-billion dollar company. if you or i walked into an interview for Nike and said we didn't examine our products to this standard no doubt we would not be hired. in the very least they scrutinise the product for copyright reasons.

i get what you're saying, but there’s a profit to be made in controversy and potentially offending people who are not your customers so i tend to ask myself who is really benefiting here. tbh i trust billion dollar companies like Nike as much as i trust the media. lol

but mostly i just said it to consider things from a different angle. up until that point, the only opinion mentioned in this thread was ‘this is ridiculous’. i wanted to pose the question, but what if it isn’t.

i don't see it either but if we worked for Nike we would be paid to scrutinise the product and design from every angle. we'd also have high-tech software to examine the design for us. and we'd ask ourselves ridiculous questions that normal people wouldn't do, like 'what does this read upside down?'. and 'does it read differently once put into production?', etc. etc.

i mean, i don't think Nike tried to put 'Allah' into the design. i just wouldn't put it past them to see the possibility, ignore it, then someone on the marketing team plant the idea somewhere to get people talking about it. i wouldn't even know this shoe existed unless there was controversy around it.

Most people can’t speak or read Arabic, so the designers probably had no idea it resembled a word in a language they have no connection to, period. It’s completely nonsensical to suggest the design team all knew it spelt Allah and decided to keep it there, what reason would they have to write God in Arabic on a trainer? Take that tin foil hat off.

they have the software to check other languages because they advertise in other languages.

i didn't say they inserted the word on purpose. my theory was that they knew about it.

[video="youtube;F-UO9vMS7AI"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-UO9vMS7AI[/video]

I'm surprised that the professionally offended aren't more worried that the name of their god looks like a drawing of a **** and balls.

they have the software to check other languages because they advertise in other languages.

Eko, Lyombe & Mielczarek, Natalia. (2015). When Memory "Sees Signs" and "Plays Games": An Analysis of Two Sports Shoe Controversies. Visual Communication Quarterly. Vol. 22:3, 160-173,. 10.1080/15551393.2015.1069193.
This article explores the interplay of collective memory and semiotics in two sports shoe controversies: The “Nike Air” and Adidas “JS Roundhouse Mids” affairs. It explores how two “memory communities”–Muslims and African Americans–successfully resisted objectionable corporate sports shoe products by playing “memory games.” Muslims accused Nike of inserting the sacred symbol for the word Allah on the heels of its sneakers, while African Americans accused Adidas of affixing shackles, a symbol of slavery, into its sneakers. The Nike controversy showed how Muslim groups used religious signifiers of the past to counter sacrilege in the present, while the Adidas controversy showed how African Americans used the negative memories of the past to resist an objectionable mass-market product in the present.

Nike have done this before... in 1997 they withdrew the Air Bakin trainer because its flame like 'Air' logo resulted in firey rhetoric from Muslims.