Abercrombie & Fitch’s disdain for an unwanted champion of its brand is a thoroughly modern problem, says Vikki Chowney, former editor of Reputation Online 

Our obsession with reality TV culture is hardly new. But what does surprise me is that even now, when people are more aware of advertising and PR than ever before, is that the notion of celebrity influence is still so prominent for global brands in the consumer space.

Done tastefully, we end up with beautiful adverts and amusing partnerships. But the darker side to the fact that a company can kit out Justin Bieber in a pair of jeans – and see a huge uplift in sales – is that anyone can build themselves an audience. Anyone can be a self-proclaimed advocate for your brand, whether you like it or not.

What this leaves us with is a thoroughly modern problem. Last month, just such an issue arose for American retailer Abercrombie & Fitch (A&F).

The company offered to pay the cast of MTV’s reality show The Jersey Shore not to wear its clothes, stating that their association was “contrary to the aspirational nature of our brand.”

It singled out Mike ‘The Situation’ Sorrentino, saying that he could cause “significant damage to our image.” The statement suggested that A&F understood that the show was intended for entertainment purposes, but that the brand believed that the association may be distressing to many of its fans.

‘Forget trying to control which people are allowed to be associated with your brand’

What we’re left with is a fascinating stalemate. A&F, which has in the past actually embraced the cast’s love of its clothes by creating a t-shirt with one of the show’s famous catchphrases on it, has ridden the wave of popularity – but is now finding the relationship to have negative connotations.

The very act of offering the cast money not to wear their clothes is a sneaky little PR exercise in itself, clarifying the brand’s feelings on the issue while attempting to create distance. Yet it still gives A&F a little boost in terms of coverage as the media pick up the story.

Sorrentino in retaliation turned to his near one million fans on Twitter, and volleyed a swift return, noting how odd it was to extend such as offer when it had made the t-shirt, but retaining a fairly nonplussed tone.

Once upon a time, A&F would never have had to deal with someone it hadn’t chosen to be a spokesperson for its brand in such a public way. Now, things are very different.

The statement from A&F in the first place is what I’d call a classic overreaction. The wording seems slightly snooty, and it’s got ‘stunt’ written all over it. But the situation the company finds itself in is much more interesting. No pun intended.

Though this specific example isn’t going to create any waves, there are many other situations for small businesses and blue chips alike in which they might need to respond to someone adopting a brand as their unofficial sponsor.

It’s all about letting go, and picking your battles. Though there sometimes might be people you’d rather not be associated with your brand championing it, that’s an awful lot better than no one talking about you at all.

Focusing on the engaged, passionate fans, and promoting their interaction with your products, is a far better use of resource than trying to control which people are allowed to be associated with your brand.

The popularity of TV may wane, but the ability for anyone to use the web to talk about your business certainly won’t. Then it’s all about how you navigate that.