In the hyper-competitive world of retail, a single marketing campaign can either build a legacy or ignite a firestorm. For American Eagle, its July 2025 campaign featuring Hollywood star Sydney Sweeney did both, plunging the brand into a fierce cultural debate and drawing sharp criticism from one of the industry’s most respected titans, Mickey Drexler. The former CEO of Gap and J.Crew, a man credited with shaping modern apparel retail, publicly condemned American Eagle’s handling of the situation, arguing a simple act of accountability was sacrificed for defiant silence.
The controversy began with a seemingly clever piece of marketing. The advertisement showed Sydney Sweeney buttoning up a pair of the brand’s jeans, accompanied by the slogan, “Sydney Sweeney has great jeans.” In the ad, Sweeney’s voiceover playfully states, “Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair color, personality, and even eye color. My jeans are blue.” While intended as a witty pun, the double meaning was not lost on the public. Critics online immediately connected the reference to “genes” with the pseudoscience of eugenics, a dark historical concept centered on selective breeding. The backlash was swift and severe, with social media users labeling the campaign insensitive, regressive, and tone-deaf.
As the criticism mounted, the public waited for American Eagle’s response. On August 2, 2025, the company issued a statement on Instagram, but it was not the apology many had expected. Instead, the brand doubled down. “This ad is and always was about the jeans,” the statement read. “We’ll continue to celebrate how everyone wears their AE jeans with confidence, their way. Great jeans look good on everyone.” For many, this response felt like a dismissal of their concerns, a sidestep that refused to acknowledge the unintended interpretation that had caused such offense.
It was this very response—or lack thereof—that drew the ire of Mickey Drexler. Speaking on the Rapid Response podcast on August 23, 2025, the 81-year-old retail visionary did not mince words. “I thought that they should have, and they did not, talk to the issue, went silent,” Drexler stated. “And that created more news.” With a career built on brand intuition and customer connection—having founded Old Navy and Madewell while transforming the fortunes of Gap and J.Crew—Drexler’s perspective carries immense weight. He suggested a far simpler, more human approach would have diffused the crisis. Acknowledging the mistake with a straightforward, “I screwed up, all right,” and “We learned the lesson,” would have demonstrated humility and respect for the audience, he argued. In his view, transparency is paramount. American Eagle’s silence, he contended, only amplified the negative attention, turning a marketing misstep into a prolonged brand crisis.
Drexler’s philosophy has long been rooted in a merchant’s gut feeling, a connection to the consumer that transcends data sheets and profit margins. His critique of American Eagle reflects this belief: that maintaining customer trust is more valuable than stubbornly defending a flawed campaign. His nearly 16-year tenure on Apple’s board further solidified his understanding of how the world’s most successful brands navigate public perception with care and precision.
The controversy, however, did not unfold in a simple vacuum of criticism and corporate defense. It quickly became a proxy battle in the ongoing American culture wars. While many on the left condemned the ad, it found a powerful and unexpected ally on the right. On August 4, 2025, President Donald Trump posted his support for the campaign. “Sydney Sweeney, a registered Republican, has the ‘HOTTEST’ ad out there,” he wrote. “It’s for American Eagle, and the jeans are ‘flying off the shelves.’ Go get ‘em Sydney!”
Trump’s endorsement fundamentally altered the narrative. Suddenly, the ad was no longer just a marketing blunder; it was a political statement. The commercial results seemed to validate this new framing. In the month following the ad’s release, American Eagle’s stock rose by an astonishing 26%. This occurred despite the company reporting a 5% net revenue loss in the first quarter of 2025. The Sweeney campaign, for all its controversy, was apparently driving sales. This created a paradoxical situation: was the brand alienating a segment of its customer base while simultaneously energizing another, more politically aligned one? Posts on X (formerly Twitter) captured this division perfectly. One user praised the company for its steadfastness, writing, “Notice how quickly the Sydney Sweeney ad controversy calmed down… They refused to feed the woke mob.” Others sided with Drexler, believing a crucial opportunity for brand accountability had been squandered.
The incident also intensified the so-called “jeans advertisement war.” As American Eagle grappled with its public relations crisis, its chief competitor, Gap, launched a campaign that became a viral sensation for all the right reasons. Featuring the girl group Katseye performing a dance routine to Kelis’s nostalgic 2003 hit “Milkshake,” the Gap ad was celebrated for its joyful energy and infectious appeal. It offered a stark contrast to American Eagle’s provocative and divisive strategy, highlighting two fundamentally different paths to capturing consumer attention in a crowded market.
The American Eagle-Sweeney saga serves as a critical case study for modern branding. It raises uncomfortable questions about the nature of controversy in marketing. While the immediate sales figures and stock bump suggest that “all press is good press,” the long-term impact on brand equity remains uncertain. The decision to forgo an apology, a move that Drexler saw as a cardinal sin of brand management, may have permanently alienated customers who felt their concerns were ignored. This strategy draws parallels to Bud Light’s 2023 partnership with Dylan Mulvaney, another instance where a brand found itself caught in a cultural crossfire, leading to boycotts and a significant hit to its market share.
As the dust settles, American Eagle is left to navigate the consequences. The brand successfully leveraged a controversial moment into short-term financial gain, bolstered by a powerful political endorsement. However, Mickey Drexler’s critique looms large, a reminder from one of retail’s elder statesmen that the foundation of a lasting brand is not built on fleeting sales spikes, but on an enduring relationship of trust and respect with its customers. Whether American Eagle’s gamble will pay off in the long run, or serve as a cautionary tale, is a question the entire industry will be watching.
Leave a Reply