Keith A. Fink and Associates

 

For any self-respecting middle-class teenager, it seems that no
wardrobe is complete without at least one item of clothing from
American Apparel.

Those who have never heard of the store, which churns out the jersey
hoodies, T-shirts and leggings so loved by youth, are, according to
fashionistas, either too old or too boring.

New branches of the Los Angeles-based firm are springing up on High
Streets across Britain as a serious rival to shops such as Gap and
Topshop.

But what most parents of teenagers who shop there probably don't know
is that American Apparel is attempting to widen its appeal to young
consumers with a string of highly controversial adverts.

Take this week, for example. Anyone purchasing a copy of OK! Magazine
will be greeted by the sight of a full-page American Apparel
advertisement splashed across the back cover.

Like nearly all of the company's ads, it features what appears to be
an amateur photograph of a girl in her bedroom - she looks barely old
enough to be out of school - naked but for a see-through lace
bodysuit, and sprawling on a bed in a very suggestive posture.

The girl happens to be a model, but it is the kind of photograph which
would send shivers down the spine of anyone with a teenage daughter.

Worse still, according to the company's own publicity, any of its
customers can send in photographs of themselves in American Apparel
underwear and clothing to be considered for publication  -  a worrying
thought indeed. Stunts like these have landed the firm in trouble.

A month ago, the British Advertising Standards Authority banned an
American Apparel advert which it claimed risked making a 23-year-old
woman, photographed revealing her nipple, look like a child as if 'she
was stripping off for an amateur-style photo shoot'.

This ad was just the latest in a line of highly sexualised images
featuring young models with girlish bodies.

Last year, American Apparel's turnover worldwide was around $500million.

In the UK, the 'brandless' brand - the clothes are logo free - is
adored by everyone from Amy Winehouse and Sienna Miller to the yummy
mummies of London's Kensington and Notting Hill, where new stores have
opened up selling clothing for everyone from young adults to babies.

But would they be so enthusiastic if they knew about the disturbing
background of the man behind the company?

Dov Charney is the chief executive, and already his critics have
accused him of being as sleazy as the images he personally helps to
create.

The 40-year-old Canadian, who is not married and has no children, has
a penchant for parading around his offices in his underwear and
showing off his vintage porn magazine collection.

He boasts of having a voracious sexual appetite and of having sex with
female employees.

He spurns professional models and instead handpicks girls off the
street, from strip clubs, or from his factory floor to model for sexy
photo shoots during which he himself wields the camera.

And if advertising regulators were hoping that the company would tone
down its campaigns, then this week's advertisement on the back of OK!
makes it clear Charney had no intention of doing that.

Indeed, according to one former employee of the firm, staff were told
that the company wanted to cultivate a 'dirty MySpace look' for its
ads, a reference to the disturbing trend among teens to post
provocative, seductive photographs of themselves on social networking
websites.

Charney, with his droopy moustache, straggly hair and unkempt
appearance, looks nothing like a selfmade billionaire. Those who have
met him liken his physical appearance to a Seventies porn baron.

Charney himself likes to justify his behaviour as 'sexual freedom':
'I'm not saying I want to s*** all the girls at work, but if I fall in
love at work it's going to be beautiful and sexual,' he readily
explained in one interview.

In the U.S., his alarming antics have landed him at the centre of a
string of sexual harassment cases.

One action includes claims that he chaired business meetings naked,
and had photographs of naked female employees - whom he apparently
likes to refer to as 'sluts' and 'whores'  -  on his office computer.

Charney trumpets that he likes to mix business with pleasure - and as
the mastermind behind a hugely successful international brand, the
fast-talking businessman with the murky past knows that sex sells.

Three former female employees have brought sexual harassment cases
against him - two were settled - but the allegations themselves, and
Charney's response to them, are worrying indeed.

Former sales manager Mary Nelson spoke of a 'reign of sexual terror'
and claimed she once attended a meeting where Charney wore nothing but
a sock to maintain his modesty  -  something Charney tried to justify
by claiming he was modelling a 'potential product'.

Jeneleen Floyd, who worked in the product placement department,
claimed that Charney marched into her office in a rage and demanded
that she pretend to perform a sex act for him.

If such allegations seem outlandish, U.S. journalist Claudine Ko spent
a month with Charney for Jane magazine, and described his sexual
behaviour in shocking detail. Charney later claimed he thought the
incidents, which were consensual, were private.

According to LA attorney Keith Fink, the work environment inside
Charney's office 'makes the film Animal House look like choir practice'.

Charney claims there is nothing wrong with walking around his office
in his underwear, since his company designs and manufacturers underwear.

'I frequently drop my pants to show people my new product,' he told
Fink in a legal deposition seen by the Mail this week. And he argues
that anything sexual that happens at American Apparel is consensual.

'American Apparel is a sexually charged workplace, where employees of
both genders deal with sexual conduct, speech and images as part of
their jobs.' An interesting company outlook, to say the least.

Fink is handling two more legal actions being taken against Charney by
two male employees.

Axel Brake, who was sent to Germany and put in charge of American
Apparel's European operations, claims that Charney had a group of
female employees, known as 'Dov's Girls', who were promoted despite
their lack of business experience.

According to legal papers filed at Los Angeles Superior Court: '
American Apparel employs many women who have had sex with Mr Charney.

These women are commonly referred to as "Dov's girls", "lovers of Dov"
or "FOD" (meaning "friends of Dov"). Dov's girls received bonuses from
American Apparel, even when their performance created monetary losses.'

According to another complainant, Roberto Hernandez, who used to work
in IT at American Apparel, Charney conducted meetings in the nude,
held business meetings at his LA mansion surrounded by pornographic
videos and stored pornographic images on his computer.

Just what transformed Charney into such a sexually voracious and
highly successful maverick is unclear.

His childhood in Montreal, where he was born in 1969, was middle lass
and financially secure thanks to his architect father Morris - and
utterly Bohemian thanks to his artist mother Sylvia, who sent him to a
private school aimed at cultivating an interest in the fine arts and
where he was encouraged to express his own creativity.

While at Choate Rosemary Hall boarding school in Connecticut, Charney
started his first T-shirt business, shipping American High School T-
shirts back to Canada via a train that stopped near his school.

And at Tufts University in Boston, he began running American Apparel
out of his dormitory.

Selling T-shirts printed with the Tufts logo on them, he made $4,000
in six weeks. Charney never finished his American Studies degree, but
his T-shirt business went from strength to strength.

After setting up a factory in LA in 1998, Charney became a champion of
the local immigrant population, something he has used to great effect
in American Apparel's marketing.

He says: 'My dream is that one day we will live in a world without
borders.'

Such a strong moral stance sits uneasily with the seedy descriptions
of life inside the company given by former employees. Yet the bad
publicity surrounding Charney appears to be fuelling his brand.

In May, Charney was forced to pay $5m to Hollywood veteran Woody Allen
in an out-of-court settlement after American Apparel depicted him as a
Hasidic Jew on an advertising billboard with the words 'the holy rebbe
(leader)' in Yiddish.

Charney knows that sex sells, and despite last month's slap on the
wrist from the British Advertising Standards Authority, there is no
sign this controversy will damage the runaway success of American
Apparel.

Partly, this is because Charney has harnessed all the criticism
against him to present himself as little more than a rebellious
teenager, taking a stance which, it seems, is proving popular with his
teenage fan base.

Brent Chase, American Apparel's UK operations manager, describes his
boss as 'very passionate about what he does and what he has created at
American Apparel.

Having been able to leverage art, design and technology to better the
business while maintaining an ethical production process is no small
feat'.

Maybe. But is there anything ethical about his tawdry advertisements
that perpetuate a highly sexualised image of young women in a society
facing soaring rates of teen pregnancies and underage sex.

Indeed, what effect such ads have on young girls with low self-esteem
and who believe that looks, and being sexually attractive, are all
that matters is anyone's guess.