On May 22nd as the actress Sharon Stone was about to enter a fund-raising gala for the American Foundation for AIDS Research, she said this to a journalist: “I’m not happy about the way the Chinese are treating the Tibetans because I don’t think anyone should be unkind to anyone else. And the earthquake and all this stuff happened, and then I thought, is that karma? When you’re not nice that bad things happen to you?”

In the resulting firestorm of criticism in Chinese news media and on blogs that followed her remarks, Dior, which has a contract with Ms. Stone for a face cream, removed her from advertising in China, fearing a backlash. Like many global luxury brands, Dior, which reported double-digit growth in China for the first three months of the year, looks to emerging consumer markets as a major source of revenue and obviously does not want to get embroiled in a political debate about China and its actions in Tibet.

I can understand that American’s want to be very vocal about the situation in Tibet but I’m not sure that they are reading the signals from the Chinese people too well. The Chinese, particularly young people, are adamantly against any interference from the West in Tibet and are strongly supportive of the Chinese government’s actions. Ironically, Chinese youth and young adults are looking to the West, and especially the big brands, to improve their lifestyles as they spend more on consumer goods. This puts brands such as Dior in a sticky position - use celebrities such as Sharon Stone to sell their wares but then muzzle them when they speak out about the conditions in Tibet. In America, Stone would merely be exercising her right to free speech but in China it is seen as meddling in their internal affairs. If Stone feels very strongly about the situation in Tibet why did she sign on as a model for a brand that wanted to use her in Chinese advertising? Money often speaks louder than words…until now that is. Chalk another one up to the bloggers.