English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This explorative case study addresses consequences of MNCs’ controversial branding practices across national and cultural boundaries. Bi-lingual reviews of over fifty news reports in both English and Chinese, interpretations of over 1,000 microblog messages divulge the divisive issue whether the controversy of the Gap’s China 2018 tshirt be an MNC’s “unintentional blunder,” or a “deliberate act” of unprovoked insult to indigenous consumers. Explanatory insights are gained with Sheehan’s framework of “Controversial Advertising” and Ortner’s concept of “Cultural Key Symbols.” Findings include: indigenous netizens with the onset of technological advances inhabit the new landscape of defying Gap’s social insult within 24 hours which led to Beijing’s unusual involvement; the Gap practice is deemed controversial for its misuse or creative use of the cultural key symbol as logo; and perceived insincere apology permeates distrust. In controversial branding practices, any distortional use of key cultural symbols, be it a deliberate or unintentional act, would have the power to empower, reinforce, or aggravate a collective ethnic identity. This Gap controversy has epitomized such aggravated cultural identity.

“GAP CHINA18” T-Shirt Controversy “Unintentional Blunder” or “Deliberate Act”? Interpretations from a Cultural Key Symbols’ Perspective