Nike’s ongoing silence regarding its potential involvement in a study on transgender youth athletes is making the situation worse, according to Lee Carter, a crisis management expert. Carter warns that Nike’s failure to comment only deepens the public’s questions and leaves the company at the mercy of a narrative it cannot control.
The Power of Silence
More than two weeks have passed since the New York Times reported that Nike was allegedly funding a study on transgender adolescents. The study, aimed at measuring the effects of hormone therapy, gender-affirming care, and medical transitioning on youth athletes, has sparked significant public interest. In response, a Nike executive claimed the study “was never initialized” and “is not moving forward,” but the company has refused to provide further comment despite numerous requests.
Lee Carter explains that the company’s silence on such an important matter only fuels speculation. “The question I think most people have, when you look at this is, what are you hiding? Or what’s at stake? What’s really going on?” Carter said. “Absent them saying anything, we’re left to interpret the story how we see it, and that means that the story is going to spiral in this way.”
Nike’s Political Stance and Brand Legacy
Nike has a long history of taking strong political stances, and this controversy fits into that larger narrative. The company famously backed Colin Kaepernick’s protest against racial injustice, and its support of the Black Lives Matter movement marked a significant shift in its brand identity. However, with recent leadership changes, including the return of Elliott Hill as CEO, Nike’s position on social and political issues remains unclear, adding to the confusion.
“Nike was at the forefront of being political, and they leaned into it,” Carter explained. “They can debate whether or not that was from a top-down or bottom-up decision, whatever it was, but it was a big stance that they took, plus their stance on Black Lives Matter.”
Nike’s decision to stay silent on this transgender study could be seen as another sign of its attempt to take a stance, or perhaps its failure to choose one. Carter believes that Nike’s inability to clarify its position on this matter only makes things worse.
Lessons from Bud Light’s PR Crisis
Comparing Nike’s situation to that of Bud Light, Carter suggests that brands face major consequences when they stray from their core values. Bud Light’s disastrous partnership with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney caused a massive backlash, and Carter believes the issue arose because the brand failed to align its actions with its customer base’s values.
“Crises in communications happen when you break with your values,” Carter said. “That’s a break in values that they needed to address right away.”
Nike, too, broke with the expectations its customers had when it first aligned with Kaepernick. Now, however, the brand faces a new challenge: to either affirm its values or let ambiguity cloud its messaging.
Nike’s Missed Opportunity
Carter argues that Nike is missing an opportunity by staying silent. If the company truly wants to remain consistent with its values, it should publicly affirm its position on the study and clarify whether it intends to continue its advocacy efforts.
“Some people would actually say, ‘I’d be proud to wear Nike because of what they do,’ because there’s a huge market in that,” Carter said.
“But neither side is going to be excited about what Nike is doing here.”
Nike’s silence may not only harm its relationship with consumers but could also alienate both sides of the political spectrum. If the company is to recover from this situation, it must find a way to address the issue directly and with clarity.
The Road Ahead for Nike
As the questions continue to mount, Nike’s silence remains a significant issue. Crisis management experts, like Carter, stress that the longer the company delays providing answers, the harder it will be to regain control of the narrative.
While some may argue that Nike has a chance to reaffirm its commitment to social causes, it must act swiftly before the crisis escalates further.
