Back to the archive

The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2021

PurCotton's 'self-defense' ad blamed the victim — three apologies made it worse

A makeup-wipe ad showed a stalked woman saving herself by looking ugly. The brand's apologies then spent more words praising itself than apologising.

PurCotton · Winner Medical · 2021-01-08

What happened

In January 2021, PurCotton, a Chinese cotton-goods brand owned by listed company Winner Medical, released a short video ad titled 'Self-Defense' for its makeup-removal wipes. The plot: a young woman is followed at night by a man; she wipes off her makeup with the product; the stalker sees her bare face, is repulsed, and flees. The ad framed a woman's appearance as the cause of, and solution to, harassment.

The video was exposed on Douban on January 8 and spread to Weibo, where the topic drew over 130 million views. China Women's Daily published a commentary saying the brand needed to 'cleanse its values.' PurCotton's first response called the video an 'advertising creative' meant to highlight cleaning power. That afternoon it posted a formal apology. On January 10 it posted a longer statement that listed the company's history, patents and quality record — readers mocked it as an 'advertising-style apology,' one per cent contrition and ninety-nine per cent self-promotion.

By January 11 the brand had apologised three times. Winner Medical's securities department confirmed the chairman had personally reviewed the apology letter. The company promised to hold the responsible managers accountable. Each new statement reopened the story rather than closing it, and the episode became a textbook case in how not to handle a brand crisis in China's social-media era.

Why it happened

  • The creative treated a woman's face as the cause of harassment — the joke required the audience to agree the victim deserved it
  • The first response dismissed the criticism as a misunderstanding of 'creative intent,' which read as the brand defending the ad rather than withdrawing it
  • The second apology pivoted into a company brochure, signalling that the brand cared more about its reputation than the harm it had done
  • Three separate statements kept the story trending for four days instead of letting it die after one sincere withdrawal
What it costthree public apologies; state-media rebuke; brand crisisembarrassing

The lesson

An apology that spends more words defending the brand than acknowledging the harm is a second ad — and the audience reads it the same way.

Aftermath

Winner Medical's chairman confirmed he had reviewed the apology personally. The brand pulled the video and promised internal accountability. The case is still cited in Chinese marketing courses as an example of how creative shock value and crisis response can compound each other.

Sources

spotted an error? The club wants to know.

Comments · 0

    Sign in to join the comments.

    More like this

    Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →