8 textile companies that made headlines in 2025

False promises. Cultural appropriation. Exploitation. Curious partnerships. 
What’s really behind big words in adverts, behind origin labels, behind the promise of ​“sustainable”, ​“green”, ​“fair”? And who remains invisible? We’ve put together some of the scandals from 2025 for you.

1. NIKE, SUPERDRY, LACOSTE 

Ever seen a Google ad that promises sustainability but doesn’t explain what’s actually behind it? Nike advertised tennis polo shirts with ​“sustainable materials”, Superdry tempted with ​“sustainable style” and Lacoste promoted ​“sustainable children’s clothing” without sufficiently specifying or substantiating the claims in the ads. A clear case of misleading messaging, vagueness and the risk of greenwashing. The scandal around the ads banned in the UK by Nike, Superdry and Lacoste became public in December. In all three cases, according to the Advertising Standards Authority, additional information was missing to put the term ​“sustainable” into context, as well as robust evidence for the claimed environmental benefits, also with regard to the products’ entire life cycle. The ASA classified the statements as ​“absolute claims”, which require a particularly high burden of proof, and instructed the companies to formulate future sustainability claims clearly and to substantiate them accordingly.

2. DIOR 

When a cultural craft is marketed as a luxury feature but the people behind it remain unnamed, it is about a lack of recognition, a lack of transparency and a power imbalance. The scandal around Dior’s 200,000-dollar coat erupted in summer 2025, when the luxury house presented an elaborately embroidered piece at a Paris fashion show without mentioning the Indian origins or the craftspeople from Lucknow who made this coat. The garment was decorated with Mukaish embroidery, a centuries-old technique in which fine metal threads are worked into fabrics. According to several reports, twelve craftspeople worked a total of 34 days on the coat.
While luxury brands earn enormous sums from such designs, traditional craftspeople in India often struggle to survive. The Dior coat thus stands as a symbol of the imbalance between the global luxury business and local craft culture. Read more here about how exploitative fast fashion is threatening cultural heritage.

3. PRADA 

Similar to Dior, Prada sold Kolhapuri-like sandals without cultural context, which is why the company was accused of cultural appropriation: the company profits from the cultural heritage of other countries without acknowledging the origin or giving the involved craftspeople recognition and financial appreciation.

4. ZEEMAN

Diamonds for under €30? Zeeman offered pendants with lab-grown diamonds this year for €29.99. The price was explained by mass production, direct purchasing and cutting out intermediaries, but what am I paying for as a customer and which parts of the value chain remain invisible? What’s missing from this explanation are key conditions of production: In which laboratories are the stones grown? What kind of electricity is used? Where are they cut, what transport routes are involved, and is there evidence of social and environmental due diligence along the supply chain? Lab-grown diamonds are not automatically the lower-emission choice compared to conventional diamonds: Production is energy-intensive because high-pressure and high-temperature conditions are technically replicated. While in many cases the direct disruption of local ecosystems through mining is avoided, indirect effects such as those linked to energy generation remain relevant. The production context is also decisive: lab-grown diamonds are often produced in China or India, and even when they are grown in Europe, cutting often takes place outside Europe. Read more about lab-grown diamonds here.

5. BPOST

Cheap imports in huge quantities that can hardly be thoroughly checked at the EU border vs. European retailers who come under pressure. At the end of November, the Belgian postal service bpost concluded a memorandum of understanding with the Chinese e‑commerce sales portal Temu to expand the existing collaboration in Belgium and Canada. The agreement includes tests of new delivery models and the expansion of pick-up and drop-off points as well as logistics solutions for Temu’s activities in Europe. bpost thus indirectly strengthens a platform that is a direct competitor for many local retailers. The agreement makes Temu even faster and more convenient in Europe and further builds exactly the price and convenience advantage that pulls purchasing power away from local retail.
At EU level, measures against the flood of parcels are currently being discussed. From 1 July 2026, a flat-rate levy of at least €3 per parcel is to apply to small consignments under €150 from non-EU countries. An expanded logistics partnership seems, against this background, like a step that nevertheless brings such platforms even more smoothly into Europe.

6. HEALTH-HARMFUL JEWELLERY

3 out of 10 tested bracelets, earrings and necklaces showed excessively high levels of lead or cadmium. This was found during inspections by the Federal Environmental Inspectorate (Federale Milieu-Inspectie) of shipments imported into Belgium from Asia (including via Chinese online platforms). In Belgium, stricter controls of very cheap costume jewellery were therefore discussed in October. It becomes particularly critical when such items are put in the mouth, chewed on or swallowed. Lead does not enter the body through the skin, cadmium only to a very limited extent. The main risk therefore primarily concerns small children.

If you wear jewellery in everyday life, pay particular attention to material and origin information as well as high-quality workmanship. On COSH! you will find a large selection of curated jewellery labels that pursue more sustainable approaches and are safe to wear.

7. PRATO, ITALY

What do you think when you see a ​“Made in Italy” label? In Tuscany, in the textile hub of Prato, current investigations show a surprising picture: Prato is central to Italy’s industry and is simultaneously increasingly becoming a hub for crime and exploitation. The Prato chief prosecutor describes the place as ​“criminal complexity and danger”, with indications of mafia-like structures as well as of corruption between local police forces and entrepreneurs. The workshops that produce clothing and accessories for large fashion and luxury groups are suspected of irregular workers and lacking labour and safety standards. The investigations paint a very concrete pattern of exploitation: 13-hour days, hardly any breaks, seven days a week, wages of sometimes no more than three euros per hour and precarious safety conditions.

8. Adidas & Lufthansa

Have you ever come across an advert that promises climate neutrality? The NGO Environmental Action Germany (DUH) won two separate greenwashing lawsuits against Lufthansa and Adidas over misleading sustainability claims.
Have you heard of Lufthansa’s ​“Offset Flight” option? For customers, it was not sufficiently clear which emissions from the specific booked flight were to be offset, and to what extent. In addition, the reference to the purchase of Sustainable Aviation Fuel could give the impression that the extra contribution relates directly to their own flight. In the Adidas case, the Nuremberg-Fürth Regional Court prohibited the claim that the company will be climate neutral by 2050, as there were no concrete measures showing how this goal would be achieved beyond 2030. Note: Both rulings are not yet final.

It becomes clear how often value creation happens where it is barely visible: in workshops, supply chains and origin stories that are rarely told. Claims become proof problems, an image promise becomes a debate about transparency, responsibility and credibility.

If you want to decide more consciously this year which company you want to support with your purchase: On COSH! you will find brands that focus more on transparency, fairer production and more responsible practices.