search burger
search ×

Chiara Ferragni's new statement on Easter egg case ends with a "donation"

But are we sure it is a donation?


Oops there we go again, another miscommunication. In psychology it might be called denialism: an essentially irrational action that denies validation of an experience or historical event when a person refuses to accept an empirically verifiable reality. As the store in downtown Milan closes and her companies' offices seem to be emptying out Chiara Ferragni appears, thankfully this time made up and combed, in a video on Instagram where she warns with a sort of angelic air that she has reached an agreement with the Antitrust Authority and will make a "1.2 million euro donation" stressing, "I really care about this." Which is not a sanction.

Visualizza questo post su Instagram

Un post condiviso da Il Mondo della TV (@ilmondodellatv)

In what sense? Let's analyze the press release again.

First, to read it, a banner opens where there is an invitation to subscribe to the newsletter. First error.

Second mistake: "The Companies that are parties to the Proceedings have made economic commitments, consisting of payments to the social enterprise "The Fairy Children," equal, for three years, to 5 percent of their respective distributable profits, with an overall minimum of 1,200,000 euros for the three-year period." . From here we can see that it is not a donation but a fine that is deferred over three years. In other words, an agreement or plea bargain that the law provides for but why communicate it as a donation? This arrangement is to avoid a conviction. In other words by paying you can get out of trouble. Does Chiara know what she said? Because rephrasing it is, "I got off easy, I pay so I won't be convicted"!

Third mistake: he doesn't apologize, again denies, and not only pretends that everything is fine but even reads in the communiqué, "For the company this was an opportunity for internal evolution."

Again? In what sense? Was the so-called miscommunication a structural hole within the company? That is, within this company who was and is qualified? Too many question marks, right!

Fourth mistake: the sentence ends with "The behavior model may serve as a benchmark for the entire influencer marketing industry." Ah okay now we get it: Clare dictates the new regulations in case of charity for the whole influencer world. Humility first.

And finally, when there is never an end to evil, he claims, "...That his companies will formulate internal self-regulation of communication and marketing." But didn't his companies do communication and marketing before? Enough too many questions.

Let's get to the facts, and the facts are obvious. Denying the evidence is a primitive and immature reaction: it does not help us govern reality, and it does not change it. Rather, by trying to erase it, it masks or hides it, risking making it even more unmanageable over time. 

It was Sigmund Freud who first spoke of negation. Freud in his paper on Denial (1925) argued that "denial is a means of becoming conscious of the repressed. It results in a kind of intellectual admission of the removed while the essentials of removal remain. By means of the symbol of negation, thought is freed from the limitations of removal."

This study Freud did on subjects defined as "hysterical." Hard to add more. Not even a question mark.




Illustration by Gloria Dozio - Acrimònia Studios