Activism and Dependencies: Colin Kaepernick, Nike and Commercialization
Alexander Rothenberg
BCDSS PhD Researcher
In 2016, National Football League (NFL) quarterback Colin Kaepernick knelt during the US national anthem to protest against racism and police violence. This gesture triggered a controversial debate, which ended his career but sparked a broad discussion about racism. Nike used Kaepernick for an advertising campaign in 2018, which itself provoked criticism as it was at odds with the often poor working conditions in which its products were manufactured.
In 2016, quarterback Colin Kaepernick knelt during the US national anthem prior to a game to protest against racism and police violence in the USA (fig. 1). This gesture caused a huge stir. Many people supported him and saw his protest as a courageous step against inequality. Others, including then-president Donald Trump, criticized him heavily and viewed it as disrespectful to the country’s flag and soldiers. Due to his protest, Kaepernick ultimately lost his place in the National Football League (NFL), as no team would sign him up. Nevertheless, his protest sparked a broad discussion about racism in sport and in society and also influenced the Black Lives Matter movement (fig. 2).
Fig. 1: Eli Harold (#58), Colin Kaepernick (#7) and Eric Reid (#35) of the San Francisco 49ers kneel during the national anthem prior to their game against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers at Levi’s Stadium on October 23, 2016, in Santa Clara, California (photo: GettyImages 618780874, license 2024).
Fig. 2: Demonstrators from the Black Lives Matter movement kneel, like Kaepernick, as a sign of protest against racism and police violence following the murder of George Floyd. June 2, 2020, in Los Angeles, California (photo: Shutterstock-ID: 1777100639, license 2024).
In 2018, Nike launched an advertising campaign with Kaepernick’s face and the words: “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything.” (https://publish.twitter.com/?query=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2FKaepernick7%2Fstatus%2F1036695513251434498&theme=light&widget=Tweet). The campaign was both praised and criticized. Some of the criticism was directed at the manufacture of the products. The often poor working conditions and/or low wages are at odds with the glittering world of sport. In the past, NIKE (like many other fashion brands) was linked to sweatshops, forced and child labor, and environmental pollution (fig. 3).
Fig. 3: Female workers from a sewing factory in Bandung, West Java, Indonesia. The city of Bandung (like the entire island of Java) plays a significant role in global clothing manufacturing as it is known as an important location for textile and fashion production and supplies to many international brands (photo: 2023. Shutterstock-ID: 2487997465, license 2024).
The Clean Clothes Campaign is committed to ensuring that people who produce clothing can work under fair conditions. It fights against exploitation and demands that clothing is not produced at the workers’ expense. There are current campaigns that, for instance, call on NIKE to pay missed wages and severance payments and call on adidas to pay at least a living wage (www.cleanclothes.org)
In this context, the currently discussed EU Supply Chain Law is also important. It obliges companies to take responsibility for the entire production process of their products and ensure that human rights and environmental standards are observed throughout the entire supply chain.
Further Reading
Marcketti, Sara and Karpova, Elena (ed.), 2020. The Dangers of Fashion: Towards Ethical and Sustainable Solutions. Bloomsbury: London.
Marston, S. B., 2021. The Episodic Kneel: Racial Neoliberalism, Civility, and the Media Circulation of Colin Kaepernick, 2017–2020. Race Soc Probl 13, 205–214.
Rothenberg, Alexander, TBP, 2024. Elitesklavereien und Profifußball. (Dis)Kontinuitäten in der Produktion von Elitekörpern. De Gruyter: Berlin.