Balenciaga Photographer Breaks Silence Following Controversial Child Ad

[kestrel9]

https://www.newsweek.com/balenciaga-pho ... ad-1761828

https://archive.ph/lZncv

Gabriele Galimberti, the photographer involved with Balenciaga's recent disturbing ad campaign, has distanced himself from the controversial images.

The images were slammed as "child porn" by some online. The fashion brand has since apologized and suggested it would take legal action against Galimberti and "the parties responsible for creating the set."

Speaking to Newsweek, Italian-born Galimberti suggests he wasn't the one responsible for the images.

"I am not in a position to comment Balenciaga's choices, but I must stress that I was not entitled in whatsoever manner to neither chose the products, nor the models, nor the combination of the same," he told Newsweek.

The pictures went viral when social media users compared the images as "child porn."

The Balenciaga Objects shoot included several photos of children with a series of items, including one photo with a toy bear wearing what appeared to be bondage gear. Another photo showed a toy bear wearing a string vest and a choker.

"As a photographer, I was only and solely requested to lit the given scene, and take the shots according to my signature style," Galimberti continued. "As usual, the direction of the campaign and of the shooting are not on the hands of the photographer."

"I suspect that any person prone to pedophilia searches on the web and has unfortunately a too easy access to images completely different than mine, absolutely explicit in their awful content. Lynching like these are addressed against wrong targets, and distract from the real problem, and criminals."

He also stressed that he wasn't involved with the other ad campaign by Balenciaga and Adidas, which showed a bag positioned on top of a pile of papers.

Among these papers was a page taken from the 2008 Supreme Court ruling United States v. Williams. According to Oyez, a free law project by Cornell's Legal Information Institute, the said case examined whether laws banning the "pandering"—promoting—of child pornography curtailed First Amendment freedom of speech rights.

Having seen images of his 'signature style' from his Toy Stories series (different children from different countries with their favorite toys placed neatly around them) I believe him. I lost a post earlier today where I mentioned that it would seem like professional suicide for Galimberti to plan a photo shoot sexualizing kids with the fetish themed toy bags. He was either not paying attention to the bags (he didn't choose them he claims, and they look like kids' bags), or they were believably kids' bags when you consider the line of Bratz Dolls, the LOL surprise toys and many other inappropriately dressed kids' toys that are created for kids.

Whoever hired him and did the set design with the children holding the bags are the guilty parties and somehow connected to the other ad campaign with the Borresman book and papers.

[Savesequim]

Seems like he's throwing Demna under the bus.

[Heisenberg123]

I dont buy argument that it distracts from real problem/real criminals. In fact child modelling is often associated with groomers and especially if it is really bizarre one. I would personally ban child modelling for most purposes. Only for specific, and for beauty? No. Thats kinda creepy. For toys, specific ads maybe yes. This ad is weird as hell tho I admit. But for beauty or anything else or in creepy context? Hell no. Let kids be kids not tools in hands of adults for entertainment. Society is already focused too much on the looks. Its so wrong on many levels.

[kestrel9]

Balenciaga files 25 million dollar lawsuit against set decorator Nicholas Des Jardins, his company of the same name, and North Six, Inc.

http://nicholasdesjardins.com/


https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/bal ... 57741.html

Balenciaga has filed a $25 million lawsuit against the production companies responsible for an ad campaign that featured children holding teddy bears wearing BDSM gear and, in one case, an “unsettling document,” drawing accusations of child sexualization.

On Friday, the luxury fashion house submitted papers to the Supreme Court of the State of New York naming set designer Nicholas Des Jardins, his company of the same name and North Six Inc. as defendants.

The brand seeks redress for “extensive damages” to its reputation caused by the Spring 2023 campaign. After the photos went viral, Balenciaga removed the images and issued an apology via Instagram.

Harper Lambert
Sat, November 26, 2022 at 5:59 PM·2 min read

Balenciaga has filed a $25 million lawsuit against the production companies responsible for an ad campaign that featured children holding teddy bears wearing BDSM gear and, in one case, an “unsettling document,” drawing accusations of child sexualization.

On Friday, the luxury fashion house submitted papers to the Supreme Court of the State of New York naming set designer Nicholas Des Jardins, his company of the same name and North Six Inc. as defendants.

The brand seeks redress for “extensive damages” to its reputation caused by the Spring 2023 campaign. After the photos went viral, Balenciaga removed the images and issued an apology via Instagram.



“We sincerely apologize for any offense our holiday campaign may have caused,” read the official statement. “Our plush bear bags should not have been featured with children in this campaign.”

The statement also apologized for “displaying unsettling documents” in the campaign, referring to a printed copy of a court decision concerning child pornography that appeared in one of the photos.

Balenciaga condemned the inclusion of these “unapproved items” and said it will be taking legal action against the parties that created the set.

In the wake of the scandal, Gabriele Limberti, one of two photographers behind the photoshoot, wrote on Instagram that he had received “hundreds of hate mails and messages.” ...

He argued that his photographs were being unfairly targeted as pedophilic, distracting “from the real problem, and criminals.” Limberti emphasized that he has “no connection” to the image featuring the Supreme Court document.

Neither Limberti nor Chris Maggio, the photographer allegedly responsible for that photo will be subject to legal action, a Balenciaga spokesperson told The Daily Mail.

Summons with Notice
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents ... h_notice_1

Despite the flood of social media responses aimed at the oddly dressed plush toys, Balenciaga hedged the suit against the company specifically because the ad briefly included images of legal documents from a US Supreme Court decision on child pornography laws.

The fashion house is seeking to "redress for extensive damages defendants caused in connection with an advertising campaign Balenciaga hired them to produce," the court documents read, alleging that North Six and Des Jardins purposefully included the Supreme Court papers without telling Balenciaga, an act which they claim was " malevolent or, at the very least, extraordinarily reckless."

"As a result of Defendants’ misconduct, members of the public, including the news media, have falsely and horrifically associated Balenciaga with the repulsive and deeply disturbing subject of the court decision," the filing continued. "Defendants are liable to Balenciaga for all harm resulting from this false association." https://radaronline.com/p/balenciaga-su ... -campaign/

A pic not often seen, presumably it's part of the same ad campaign Someone noted that the 'Hotels & Resorts' printed on the bedspread appears at a glance to say 'Hot ..... escorts', the girl is blocking the center. https://twitter.com/ApostateGallery/sta ... 8636800007 There's also a stuffed toy snake above the be with one of the plushie bags I believe Balenciaga said should never have been in a photo shoot with children, or that children should never have been in the photo shoot to begin with. Another of the bags, is on the floor, and a third on the nightstand by the bed. The child model is holding her arms in an awkward position, don't know what to make of that, is it symbolic?
PIC https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FiQV48GXkAE ... name=large