The Devil Wears Primark?

Hey don't underestimate the power of boycotting, protesting, and well... producing negative portrayals using the medium of television. I do agree that Primark isn't the root of sweatshop evil, but clearly this type of documentary requires something accessible to focus on rather than do a broad sweep of sweatshops in general.

Firefly007 wrote:

Hey don't underestimate the power of boycotting, protesting, and well... producing negative portrayals using the medium of television. I do agree that Primark isn't the root of sweatshop evil, but clearly this type of documentary requires something accessible to focus on rather than do a broad sweep of sweatshops in general.

I appreciate your point, but I can't help but think that its just pandering to hype. Why is it only brought up when the clothes get cheaper? It seems to me they are basically saying "oh well if the company does it, but they mark up their clothes massively to make even more profit off the sweatshops and don't pass the saving on to the consumer, then it is ok"!

I disagree. What about Nike? They constantly mark up prices and still get tons of attention for their involvement in sweatshops. And while Walmart does offer relatively low prices, with the massive amount of money they save utilizing cheap labor I wouldn't say they pass on their savings to customers by any means. Can you claim Walmart wrong-doings are overlooked by media? Not at all. News stations, documentaries, petitions and protests galore.

Firefly007 wrote:

I disagree. What about Nike? They constantly mark up prices and still get tons of attention for their involvement in sweatshops. And while Walmart does offer relatively low prices, with the massive amount of money they save utilizing cheap labor I wouldn't say they pass on their savings to customers by any means. Can you claim Walmart wrong-doings are overlooked by media? Not at all. News stations, documentaries, petitions and protests galore.

What about the Gap though? They were known for being bad for it a while back, but noone paid it the slightest bit of attention?
I appreciate the point about Nike though, and its a good one. I wonder if its because it is specialist and doesn't appeal to the sort of fashion-types that bring the whole thing up. Whereas the Gap are well-loved...

Also, we don't have Walmart here so I don't know about its media attention. We have Asda which is owned by Walmart, which I imagine is being attacked under this launched attack on cheap high-street stores.

Last edited by AiLing (05-28-2008 10:52)

i didnt even know that primark uses sweatshops
thats horrible!!!!. anyway i dont even go shopping at primark any longer, but i wanna see the programme because it sooo amazing the way sooo many people go shopping in primark yet they dont even know who is making the clothes for them to wear!!!
is primark only in britain?????
i like alexa chung thougt(the person in the programme)
i like her fashion sense!!!!

It isn't just Primark so I don't think it's fair to pick on just them. Plenty of stores use sweatshops, I think they should be highlighting them as well and not just Primark.

PrincessDollface wrote:

Another thing I thought about after reading your post Ailing is that if people DO boycott & Primarks sales go down, then in theory we're taking away jobs from the workers in these aforesaid sweatshops.  Ok so I know its a crappy wage but in countries where jobs are very scarce surely a poorly paid job is better than none at all?

Yes. Who are we as developed countries to tell developing countries how to develop? Remember, child labour was extremely common in the UK during the industrial revolution and it wasn't the intervention of other countries that stopped it. I don't condone these conditions, but I feel the change needs to come from within. The best thing Western countries can do is help to educate the workers suffering about how they can change things.

Its so much more complicated than they make it seem on the tv.

ViCTORiAsecretx I applaud you. In my opinion you have absolutely hit the nail on the head and smashed that bad boy into the ground. Your opinion is well researched and well argued, and you've got a brilliant undersanding on the complex world of economics. All at 16!

ViCTORiAsecretx that was a brilliant post. I completely agree with you. Although we can all agree sweatshops are wrong, pointing the finger at Primark alone smacks of sensationalism. They're only targeting it because their clothes are cheap (luckily, or I'd have nothing to wear - poor student here!), and because its popularity has rocketed within the last few months. For a programme like this, Primark is an easy target. The public will readily believe that they're using sweatshops because their prices are so low.

If they did an programme like this about some of the more upmarket high street shops then people would be less likely to believe it - as ViCTORiAsecretx said, people tend to believe that if you spend £30 on a top, a greater amount of money is going to the people who made it. Not true! The shop itself is just raking in a higher profit, that's all! Many of the high street shops (here in Britain, at least), source their products from the same places. That top you buy in New Look may have been made in the very same factory as that skirt you buy in H&M, or that dress you buy in Warehouse.

Conditions definitely need to improve in sweatshops, no doubt about it, but in my opinion boycotting one shop all the way over here in the UK will not make a difference. As AiLing said, the change needs to come from within. There need to be some fundamental changes, definitely. But starting a witch hunt against Primark isn't going to help.

AmyLouRichie wrote:

Its really easy to defend primark saying well the other shops do it, so why bother. But we don't know for sure that the other shops do do it. And you need to ask yourself why it is you're sticking up for primark, because you genuinely think they've done nothing wrong and slave labour is ok, or is it more because you just don't want the hassle of having to shop elsewhere??

I think we've made it clear why we are defending primark, and you can review ViCTORiAsecretx's post if you didn't catch it while reading through. My view, in summary is:

Noone condones it, but by trying to change it are we not just imposing our ideals on other nations? The economics of the situation are so complex that a simple boycott is not a good answer. By boycotting stores, it is the factory workers who will suffer, not benefit as a consequence. Working conditions like that are the norm in a lot of developing countries across all industries and by artificially raising the standard of conditions in one industry, what is the consequence?
Consider this situation. For example many people in the world are starving. If we simply give them free food, who will buy food from local producers? Then the local producers will give up trying to produce food and the economy will grind to a halt. It is an extreme example but it shows the danger of meddling too much in the economic affairs of other countries can have.

Also, why are Primark specifically targeted, while stores that sell at a higher mark-up escape criticism? It seems to be that it is always people who are in a position to afford more expensive things are critical of cheap things. I read this article in Marie Claire the other day where this awful woman said that cheap stores that sell ethical clothing (eg organic cotton) are as bad as if they didn't because they're selling the other stuff at the same time. What sort of nonsense is that? I for one am tired of being dictated to by well-off individuals who lack any learned opinions and just hop on bandwagons.

Lastly, why should a cotton vest cost more than £1? Who is actually benefitting except the shop that sells it?

Last edited by AiLing (05-29-2008 15:20)

Victoria's right - Primark buy in masses - a thing called purchasing economies of scale to those who do geography or economics - and this enables them to sell clothes cheaply over smaller shops. Their partake in the Clean Up Fashionn and toher ethical programmes is appluadable.

It's interesting what you mention about the '£30 top' saga - something again called a giffen good; customers will pay more for a good as they acossiate it with quality. Which isn't necessarily true - the worst top I ever bought was an Elle top (I know, ew) which de-shaped and got funny marks on it after the first wash. I paid £14 for it about three years ago. It's interesting that a shop that, although I love, charges often ridiculous amounts for clothes - Topshop - was the target of ethical protests this year.
http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/6821

This process of poor manufacturing condition is part of a country's industry cycle. In time, the government will be able to afford to introduce legislation that improves working conditions. It happened with Britain - see the 1844 Factories Act which protected women and children after incidents like children getting scalped by machinery occured, the 1871 Trade Unions Act which recognised trade unions by law and the 1885 Working Class Dwellings Act, which improved life for the poor once again.

It's a slow process, but eventually life improves for poorer clountries. However, in this day and age it has to be done by foreign investment within the country and of course, encouragement by developed countries.

Please note it only sounds like they're picking on Primark because it's got the same letter sound as Prada - merely a play on words I think :B

Just want to add something myself if that’s ok

Apart from the whole child labour, poverty, sweat shops, like Victoria said earlier in the post are absolutely awful, but let’s think closer to home a little. As various people have said a lot of people cannot afford more expensive clothing, but how about not being able to afford a loaf of bread?

One of my good friends is 19 and has two children under 2, she had a difficult upbringing and was one of these council estate girls, but she has moved 5 hours away from everything to start a new life with her partner and children, she is basically surviving on benefits and people may say she brought this on herself but still she needs to survive and bring up her children best she can, so if buying £2 clothes for her and her children gives them more money to pay the bills and buy the essentials than I say THANK GOD FOR PRIMARK!

I find it quite upsetting that these people who turn their nose up think that other people must just float around and not need money. A prime example is when I tried to apply for Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) which is money from the government to help support your learning and the costs of it if you have a low income family. When I rung up this organisation to ask why I was rejected they said they didn’t believe that my family was living on such a low income, I told them we were and in the end had to sent letters from the council saying that was it no more no less.

I think some times people are completely unaware of the poverty in their own country let alone 3rd word ones.

WOO Rant over!