The role of a graphic designer goes far beyond creating attractive visuals. A designer’s choices shape how people interpret products, how audiences see themselves in relation to brands, and ultimately how culture is influenced by visual communication.
Designers are not just decorators. They are also communicators, problem solvers, and storytellers whose work can reinforce or challenge social norms. For that reason, designers have an ethical responsibility to consider the impact and perception of their work, not just the surface-level appeal.
A recent example of how this responsibility can be mishandled is the American Eagle ad campaign featuring Sydney Sweeney with the slogan “Sydney Sweeney Has Great Genes Jeans.”
American Eagle’s Jean Campaign, Ft. Sydney Sweeney
At its core, the campaign was built to sell denim. American Eagle’s fall and back-to-school ads highlighted Sydney Sweeney as the face of their jeans collection, aiming to attract a young female audience.
The campaign relied on wordplay between “genes” and “jeans,” creating posters and billboards that literally crossed out “genes” and replaced it with “jeans.” The idea was meant to be clever, memorable, and appealing to the demographic that sees Sweeney as a fashion icon and cultural figure.
By tying their product to her star power, American Eagle hoped to inspire young women to associate their jeans with Sweeney’s style, beauty, and lifestyle.
What “Great Genes/Jeans” Implies
The problem lies in how the campaign framed those associations. “Genes” was not just a word in a pun. It carried with it an implication that Sweeney’s appearance – her blond hair, blue eyes, slim figure, and Eurocentric features – were genetically superior qualities worth desiring.
The campaign used her physical traits as a stand-in for personal value, then connected those traits to the product. While the intent may have been playful, the execution reinforced narrow beauty standards and left no room for inclusivity.
At a time when the fashion industry has been working to broaden representation across body types, races, and identities, this ad felt like a step backward.
The Problem with Genetic Messaging
This campaign can be considered unethical in several ways. First, it objectified the model, reducing her to her body and her “good genes” as a marketing device.
It explicitly excluded vast groups of women by suggesting that desirability and worthiness are tied to a certain look or biological makeup. It also flirted with deeply problematic undertones connected to eugenics, even if unintentionally.
By choosing this framing, the brand misrepresented fashion as something that could give consumers access to traits they could never realistically attain. There was no acknowledgment of diversity, inclusivity, or individuality anywhere in the campaign. Instead, the message implied that jeans, and by extension beauty, are only valuable when linked to conventionally “acceptable” genetics.
Impact on the Target Audience
The impact of this kind of messaging on the target audience can be severely damaging. Young women are already under enormous pressure to meet unrealistic beauty standards, and advertising like this reinforces the idea that their worth lies in appearance and genetics rather than personality, creativity, or individuality.
For women of color and those who do not fit the stereotypical “good genes” mold as outlined by American Eagle, the ad encouraged alienation and feelings of exclusion. Instead of broadening their customer base by promoting inclusivity, American Eagle narrowed it and sparked criticism that overshadowed the actual product.
A Comparative Case: Gap’s Inclusive Denim Campaign, Ft. KATSEYE
This campaign could have been handled differently in several ways. The pun itself could have been avoided altogether, or at least reframed in a way that highlighted style, creativity, or individuality rather than genetics.
Instead of focusing on one celebrity’s body and appearance, the campaign could have featured multiple models representing different races, body types, and backgrounds to highlight the versatility of the jeans. The visuals could have emphasized comfort, durability, or self-expression rather than innate biology.
In fact, Gap, an American Eagle competitor, released a campaign shortly after this one that took the opposite approach. They partnered with the diverse global music group KATSEYE, showing the performers dancing, moving, and expressing themselves in Gap denim. Rather than centering a single celebrity’s “good genes,” Gap highlighted energy, individuality, and inclusivity, reinforcing the idea that denim is for everyone.
This contrast demonstrates that American Eagle had the opportunity to celebrate diversity while still using Sweeney’s influence as a cultural figure. Instead, they relied on reductive messaging that ultimately harmed the brand’s reputation.
Ethical Design in Practice
The ethical responsibilities of designers come into sharp focus when analyzing cases like this. Designers should create ethical designs because their work is inseparable from the culture in which it exists. Visual communication not only sells products but also communicates values.
When those values reinforce stereotypes or harmful norms, the consequences extend far beyond the brand itself. Unethical campaigns can damage trust, alienate consumers, and even cause psychological harm to audiences who internalize those messages.
The controversy around the “Great Genes / Jeans” slogan demonstrates how quickly a campaign can shift from attention-grabbing to tone-deaf when ethical considerations are ignored.
Avoiding Pitfalls and Preventing Harm
Designers can ensure their work avoids these pitfalls by building systems of critical review and feedback into the process. This can mean more than just an internal design critique.
Consumer testing with diverse focus groups can reveal whether audiences interpret a slogan or image in harmful ways. Cultural review panels that include people from a range of racial, gender, and body-type perspectives can flag issues that might not be visible to a homogenous team.
Even simple measures, like asking whether a campaign uplifts rather than diminishes its audience, can prevent mistakes before they reach the public. By committing to inclusive representation, transparency, and honesty, designers can create campaigns that promote products without resorting to manipulation, exclusion, or misrepresentation.
Ethical Design is Not Optional
Ultimately, the Sydney Sweeney campaign is a reminder that clever wordplay and celebrity endorsements are not enough to make a design effective.
A campaign that is visually appealing but ethically flawed will harm both the audience and the brand. The responsibility of a designer is not just to create attractive brand identities, but to create ones that respect, include, and uplift the people they are meant to reach.
Ethical design is not optional. It is central to the integrity of both the profession and the culture it influences.
Sources
- American Eagle. “American Eagle on Instagram: “Posters Up. Secrets Out: Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans.”.” Instagram, 23 July 2025, www.instagram.com/p/DMdIuUoRYAL/.
- Betts, Anna. “American Eagle Faces Backlash over ‘Sydney Sweeney Has Great Jeans’ Ad.” The Guardian, 29 July 2025, www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jul/29/american-eagle-sydney-sweeney-jeans-ad.
- D’Inocenzio, Anne. “American Eagle Responds to Critics over Ad with Sydney Sweeney, Saying It Was Always About the Jeans.” AP News, 1 Aug. 2025, apnews.com/article/american-eagle-sydney-sweeney-353699aaaa0660d772b94cb33932a794.
- Finn, Sophie. “How Sydney Sweeney’s Ads for American Eagle Have Prompted ‘white Supremacy’ Accusations.” TheJournal.ie, 30 July 2025, www.thejournal.ie/sydney-sweem-american-eagle-campaign-6777875-Jul2025.
- Hamoun, Ani. “Gap Vs. American Eagle: Which Viral Denim Ad Won 2025?” Brand Vision Insights, 18 Sept. 2025, www.brandvm.com/post/gap-vs-american-eagle-ads-2025.
- Slade-Brooking, Catharine. Creating a Brand Identity: A Guide for Designers. Available from: MBS Direct, Hachette, 2016.
- Snow, Isis. “What Sydney Sweeney’s American Eagle Ad Says About a Divided America.” The Independent Florida Alligator, 7 Aug. 2025, www.alligator.org/article/2025/08/what-sydney-sweeney-s-american-eagle-ad-says-about-a-divided-america.
Leave a Reply