Royal baby used to ...
 

[Closed] Royal baby used to advertise big clothing company - what happend to privacy?

9 Posts
9 Users
0 Reactions
62 Views
Posts: 24
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Just seen Archie the royal baby being used to advertise H&M clothes on the companies website. I thought Royals were not supposed to do this sort of thing while on publicly funded tours representing the UK etc.

https://www2.hm.com/en_gb/kids.html

Picture of the baby and Meghan Markle (his mother) and the words
" A Royal baby first. Archie Mountbatten Windsor wears H&M baby. "

Or have H&M very misused a press photo ? Its in the middle of lots of similar styled, posed professional photos, all look taken for advertisement purposes.


 
Posted : 26/09/2019 8:55 pm
 Drac
Posts: 50474
 


 
Posted : 26/09/2019 9:06 pm
Posts: 50252
Free Member
 

Picture in public domain used by company to promote their products.

What's your point, caller?


 
Posted : 26/09/2019 9:10 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

That is against advertising laws....well it was when I sold advertising....

Yip, just checked, against advertising standards.


 
Posted : 26/09/2019 9:10 pm
Posts: 20668
Free Member
 

Is against standards if approval was given though?

And if they are doing H&M, which rung of the royal gravy train ladder will be spunking for Primark?


 
Posted : 26/09/2019 10:29 pm
Posts: 806
Free Member
 

So the image is on the H&M site as opposed to on an ad unit?

Few possibilities then

- maybe the photographer sold the image to the retailer after they spotted baby was in one of their outfits
- maybe there's a "product placement" deal in place (personally I see no problem with that)
- maybe H&M sent a care package to the family in the hope something would be worn and spotted (very common pr model)

All in all, I can't see any problem.


 
Posted : 27/09/2019 7:00 am
Posts: 281
Free Member
 

1. Harry has made an arrangement with H&M to use his child’s image for advertising - dubious, in my view, for a whole host of reasons he’ll come to regret.
2. H&M are taking the piss and a stern letter is on its way to their legal team suggesting they cease and desist. Whether the photo is in the public domain or not is irrelevant, using a persons image for advertising is a different matter.


 
Posted : 27/09/2019 7:50 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Advertising standards are clear, even with permission photos of royals cannot be used for advertising (there is a grey area around biographys/books).

Companies with a Royal Warrant (ie the approval to be a royal supplier) have to be super careful about how they promote that.

It is seen as unfair to others. I suspect it will be gone soon!


 
Posted : 27/09/2019 8:05 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I cannot believe no one has called it out already.......

H&M??!!!?????
H and M????

HARRY AND MEGHAN.

Royals using position to promote own, sweatshop based, clothing company.

Surely that's the bigger scandal?


 
Posted : 27/09/2019 8:09 am
Posts: 9525
Full Member
 

They won't be doing it for the money surely.
My nephew did quite a bit of modelling as a baby (For stores such as H&M, wallmart etc.) Once agents fees were paid and travelling expenses there wasn't much money left.


 
Posted : 27/09/2019 8:57 am