Uniqlo’s China crisis: Lost in translation

Japanese clothing giant Uniqlo has found itself at the center of renewed controversy regarding its use of Xinjiang cotton, after a simple miscommunication about its sourcing practices quickly developed into a major public relations issue. The incident, originating from a TV interview, reignited long-standing debates over Xinjiang-related labor concerns, underscoring the fragility of cross-cultural communication and highlighting the risks that misinterpretations pose for international brands operating in mainland China. The brouhaha stemmed from a translation error during a BBC interview with Tadashi Yanai, CEO of Fast Retailing, parent company of Uniqlo, Theory, Comptoir des Cotonniers, and Helmut Lang. Asked whether Uniqlo uses cotton from Xinjiang, Yanai stated in Japanese, “We haven’t used Xinjiang cotton, yet,” a nuanced and deliberately non-committal comment characteristic of diplomatic language. However, the BBC translated this as “does not use Xinjiang cotton,” implying a definitiveness Yanai had sought to avoid. When Chinese media picked up the translated statement, the nuance was lost, leading to sensational headlines suggesting that Uniqlo had refused to use Xinjiang cotton and was planning to sever ties completely. Chinese tabloids further amplified the story, presenting Yanai’s words as an alignment with Western brands’ refusal to source cotton from Xinjiang – which sparked major boycotts in 2021. Social media users soon responded, with the hashtag “Uniqlo founder said not using cotton from Xinjiang” trending briefly on platforms like Weibo. This incident illustrates how delicate and easily misconstrued international communication can be, particularly when involving sensitive issues like Xinjiang, where accusations of forced labor have prompted global scrutiny. Uniqlo has grown into a dominant fast-fashion retailer in mainland China since entering the market in 2002. Today, China accounts for around 22% the brand’s global sales, and – unlike rivals such as H&M – Uniqlo has so far managed to avoid taking a definitive stance on the contentious issue of using Xinjiang cotton, largely insulating it from backlashes in recent years. Implications for brands So far, despite the media amplification, this controversy has yet to trigger a consumer backlash comparable to earlier Xinjiang cotton incidents. While Yanai’s comments provoked some criticism, calls for a boycott of Uniqlo have failed to catch on, with many netizens pushing back against the idea of a boycott, citing the economic difficulties facing ordinary Chinese consumers. As one Weibo user noted, “Why boycott Uniqlo? We can’t afford to make life harder for ourselves.” This more pragmatic response suggests a shifting sentiment among Chinese consumers. As economic uncertainty persists, the priority is increasingly on affordable quality over nationalism-driven consumption choices. This incident serves as a reminder of the precarious position that global brands occupy in China, especially regarding politically sensitive topics. While Uniqlo’s recent challenge suggests that Chinese consumers may be less inclined to support nationalist boycotts during economic uncertainty, complacency would be risky. For Uniqlo, and other international brands operating in China, it is crucial to ensure that all communications are carefully vetted across languages and contexts to prevent misunderstandings. Yanai’s ambition to make Uniqlo the largest clothing retailer worldwide hinges on the Chinese market, which means the company must continue to tread carefully, ensuring clarity in every word — whether in Japanese, English, or Chinese.

Sectors

Insights

Company

Uniqlo’s China crisis: Lost in translation