The Problem with BLACKPINK #2NE1DeservedBetter

DISCLAIMER: We do not hate the individual idols in BLACKPINK, but this is a critical look at their marketing and image.

With massively viral music videos, a Netflix documentary and countless brand deals, BLACKPINK has become the premier world-wide girl group. News of their successes increase the quartet's global exposure day after day, but many new fans do not realize the history behind BLACKPINK and why they were actually very controversial with established Kpop fans among debut. BLACKPINK represents a step backwards from the artistry and autonomy of generation two idols, as well as a step towards the cultural appropriation of black culture that Kpop has become increasingly infamous for internationally.

BLACKPINK was created as the "pretty" 2NE1

2NE1 is the precursor to BLACKPINK. 2NE1 debuted in 2009 as the sister group to BIG BANG, and being the younger sibling to the "Kings of Kpop" is certainly a lot to live up to, yet 2NE1 did so in stride. To this day, they remain one of the best selling girl groups of all time ("List of best-selling girl groups") and are respected for breaking barriers in an industry that favored male acts. Their advantage was their image, which defied the beauty and narrative standards for female idols of the time; take a look at their song "Ugly," in which they sing: "I think I'm ugly and no body wants to love me, [...] Don't lie to my face / telling me I'm pretty." Compared to songs like Girls' Generation's "Oh!" or KARA's "Jet Coaster Love," which exemplify the cutesy and colorful image of popular girl groups from the same time, 2NE1 was refreshingly anticonformity.

However, 2NE1 was much more than just a novelty group, and even their messy breakup in early 2017 made headlines. YG Entertainment drove a narrative that suggested the group's disbandment was due to member Bom's "drug scandal" (the drug in question being an antidepressant that she was prescribed in the US) ("2NE1's Park Bom's drug scandal explained"). While netizens blamed Bom's tarnished image, fans blamed YG Entertainment's mishandling of the situation ("2NE1 Fans And Netizens Blame Park Bom And Yang Hyun Suk"). But whether we blame Bom or not (we don't), YG Entertainment was now down their female cash cow.

It is no secret that YG Entertainment meant to capitalize off of 2NE1's success with another, younger group, as is the industry standard for debuting new groups in the same company. When 2NE1 was still in the public's good graces, YG Entertainment had promoted a project called Future 2NE1, supposedly to be 2NE1 successor ("Future 2NE1 was supposed to debut at the same time as BlackPink"). However, what was disturbing about BLACKPINK's debut as a sister group was the direction YG Entertainment decided to go with the image of the group:

I tried to make the YG version of a girl group like I did with 2NE1. But this time I wanted the girls to look pretty too, with skills. ("Blackpink is just another pretty version of 2NE1")

What does this mean? BLACKPINK follows the prototype that 2NE1 created; any fan can see the similarities between CL and Lisa's rapping or Bom and Rose's husky main vocals. They even share the obligatory pretty-but-superflous member role in Dara and Jisoo. But, as YG stresses, BLACKPINK's difference is that they can be considered "pretty" compared to 2NE1. This is a slap in the face to 2NE1, who achieved their legacy by daring to be defy Korea's strict beauty standards.

Additionally, more details about BLACKPINK's image surfaced that did not sit right with fans of 2NE1. A former YG Enterainment employee revealed that "songs that were written for 2NE1 have been handed over to other YG artists, among those is ‘As If It’s Your Last’ of BLACKPINK." ("A YG staff exposes the unfair treatment towards 2NE1"). It is no crime to share songs among, certainly SM Entertainment often seems to exchange songs between groups, perhaps most famously "Chewing Gum" being meant for Red Velvet ("'Chewing Gum' was originally Red Velvet's song?"). And songs that are written with certain artists in mind may not end up there, for example Girl's Day "Something" which was reportedly meant for SISTAR Hyolyn's solo debut ("Girl's Day 'Something' Was Originally Written For Sistar’s Hyorin"). However, these claims, along with the mistreatment of 2NE1 members as alleged by the former employee, leads to the implication that BLACKPINK was formed to erase, not build upon, 2NE1's legacy.

Many years ago, on Instagram, CL and Minzy uploaded photos with the caption included “Playing With Fire” and “Forever Young“. Somehow, those are the same as the tracks that were later released by BLACKPINK. ("A YG staff exposes the unfair treatment towards 2NE1")

The problem is not switching up artists, but rather the fact that BLACKPINK had no unique identity upon debut. Even between companies, groups tend to have unique identifiers that set them apart as artists; for example, the bubbly and bright Girls' Generation vs. the mysterious and cool f(x). But BLACKPINK simply piggybacked off the success of 2NE1, attempting to pick up where the group left off, without any of the struggle to the top. By making BLAKPINK the "pretty" 2NE1, 2NE1's uniqueness and legacy is destroyed. The unfair standards for female idols that 2NE1 worked so hard to break were placed right back on, and BLACKPINK's continued success with this "pretty" image has only solidified these unrealistic beauty standards.

More on SM Entertainment's girl groups: SM Entertainment and Queer Baiting: A History

BLACKPINK as Brand Ambassadors

As we all know, millennials are ruining countless industries! This is because Western consumers are becoming increasingly distrustful of brands, instead craving "authenticity" ("How millennials’ taste for ‘authenticity’ is disrupting powerful brands"). In direct contrast, Korean consumers are more welcoming of brand names, and use them as an indicator of social status. According to one article, "South Koreans consider brands as a representation of their image" ("How to Win the Hearts and Trust of Korean Consumers"). There are cultural factors responsible for this nuance, but in this context it only begs the question: Why are Western fans flocking to BLACKPINK when their core values deeply misalign?

All of BLACKPINK are associated with brand names in some way, but the most prominent example is Jennie being heralded as the "Human Chanel." The mere implication of that title is disturbing, as she is not an object nor an price-inflating intangible marketing strategy (as all luxury brands are... sorry Sica), but the sheer pride in which fans flaunt her apparent wealth is also incongruous with cultural distrust of wealth-hording millionaires. One article brags, Jennie "completed her Chanel look through accessorizing. Here, she's wearing a Chanel ribbon brooch and Chanel earrings, and the cost of her accessories alone are over a $1000" ("TOP 5 Moments When JENNIE Was Human CHANEL"). YG Entertainment not only tailgated 2NE1's image, but also Chanel's reputation as a brand, which, for the Korean market, is an admirable marketing strategy, though possibly disingenuous to international fans.

Before Jennie became touted as the "Human Chanel," there was an actual human Chanel, Gabrielle "Coco" Chanel. Growing up in France during the turn of the century, Chanel took on yet another name: "Westminser" - her code name during WWII while working as a spy for the Nazi party.

This wasn’t simply an opportunistic move to try and wrest her company back from the Wertheimers; she really just hated the Jews. [...] The French editor-in-chief of Marie Claire observed after a conversation with Chanel, “Chanel’s anti-Semitism was not only verbal; but passionate, demoded, and often embarrassing.” ("Coco Chanel Was a Nazi Supporter")

The problem with Jennie becoming the personification of the Chanel brand is that she takes on the good, as well as the bad. A quick Google search will illustrate the exploitation of workers in the fashion industry, including Chanel ("Chanel shoes, but no salary: how one woman exposed the scandal of the French fashion industry"). An article in the Korean Times also highlights how store owners are not compensated for the decoration of Chanel boutiques, calling it an abuse of power ("Chanel, Louis Vuitton accused of abusing power"). By conflating Jennie with a brand name, she actually taking on a liability. Yes, today Chanel may be respected. But what about tomorrow? Not even the CEO of Chanel is called the "Human Chanel," and for good reason: a person is not a company and should not be treated as an object for consumption.

While the "Human Chanel" tag could be chalked up to a cultural difference, the truth is that other popular idols have gone a different direction than her. In 2015, IU was praised for her "humble fashion sense" ("IU's humble fashion sense"). One particular dress she wore made headlines for being under thirty USD. A representative of the brand said of the sponsorship, "Current celebrities are looking for sponsors that coincide more with their style and preference than the prices of the product" ("IU's H&M Dress From The 2014 Melon Music Awards"). While IU's clothes were accessible to all, Jennie's clothes remain for only a select few. And, while IU worked with the brand, it did not become her public identity, and she did not become an object for the company to throw into the spotlight.

Members' lack of autonomy is worse than industry standard

Groups from big companies have a privilege that fans are quick to dismiss. No one is claiming that the members of BLACKPINK are not hard-working, just that they got opportunities that some groups only dream of. Take a group like SPICA for example: notable for their vocal prowess, releases well-received by the harshest of critics, touted by the Kpop 00s superstar herself, Lee Hyori, even debuted internationally with the bop "I Did It" but still disbanded, only ever gracing the top 25 on the Gaon Music Chart. I say this not to throw a pity party for a forgotten girl group, but to illustrate that Kpop success is not random and the biggest deciding factor is the company, the bigger of which have money and connections that smaller simply do not.

However, just because these girls debuted on the fast track to success does not mean that they have nothing to say. The truth is these girls probably have a lot to say, but are not allowed to. Their company uses their status against them, not allowing them to create or appear publicly without company consent. For example, when CLC Sorn hosted a vlog lunch date a few idol friends, Lisa was not allowed to show her face on camera ("Thai Food With Lisa (BLACKPINK), Elkie (CLC), & Minnie ((G)-IDLE)"). Despite the wailing of YG apologists in the comments, this is not industry standard; YG Entertainment is intentionally giving Lisa, and the rest of their idols, the least agency possible.

Lisa also seems to be held back in other ways. Upon debuting, Lisa received a copious amount of internet backlash for daring to, not only be non-Korean, but to have non-Korean features on her face ("BLACKPINK K-Pop Star Criticized for Being Thai"). The companies response has been to lighten her skin within an inch of its life, encourage rhinoplasty and hypersexualize her image through solo stages and her own Youtube Channel. She has her own YouTube channel, but can only post company approved videos such as LISA Dance Performance Video , which went viral for its sexual content. The only way Lisa has been able to express herself artistically is through being sexualized by the company at every opportunity. Mistreatment of non-Korean Kpop group members is nothing new, but it is especially concerning when a member cannot show their face in a vlog with their friends.

When we actually listen to the members of BLACKPINK, they seem to have nothing to say; their interviews are bland and do not hold much information. After releasing "Ice Cream," Jennie stated, "We wish to become a group who opens up the door for other artists to spread their music, because music is not just for your own country" ("JENNIE AND ROSÉ SPOKE UP THINKING ABOUT BLACKPINK MUSIC"). I do not disagree with this sentiment, but can you honestly say that this is all the most popular member of the most well-known girl group worldwide has to say about her success? The statement is generic and inoffensive. In contrast, other Kpop acts that debuted statewide at least acknowledge race and gender as a factor in their careers. Says former Girls' Generation member Jessica Jung: "I would be honored to be a role model for Asian-Americans to start their career in the States or worldwide" ("Jessica Jung on Recording Solo After Girls' Generation"). Former f(x) member Amber Liu: "I want to represent my community just because I’m a female, Asian, androgynous artist… Why can’t I make this a thing?" ("Amber Liu Reveals the Struggle of Being an Asian American Artist Despite Being a Former K-Pop Star"). From this we can gather that race and gender are certainly on the minds of Kpop artists debuting in the West -  but it is only BLACKPINK specifically that are banned from mentioning it.

Conclusion

YG Entertainment is branded as a company that values authenticity in their artists. In my opinion, this is just a marketing trick to get away with massive amounts of cultural appropriation ("The Black creatives and fans holding K-pop accountable"), but the irony of their branding is that BLACKPINK is possibly the least authentic group in Kpop; they did not form organically, but were chiseled from the back of 2NE1, a group that actually had an image that changed the Kpop industry. In order to conform to the mold, they are not allowed to appear or say anything that is not company sanctioned. YG Entertainment took out the aspects of 2NE1 that were actually unique and authentic and replaced them with girls who are only valued for their appearance. Consuming Kpop has never been a progressive pastime, but BLACKPINK represents a step backward in an industry that so heavily based on removing autonomy from human beings, especially young women. In some ways, BLACKPINK are indeed the perfect idols: seen and not heard.