Duke University has expressed dissatisfaction with its portrayal in the third season of HBO’s “The White Lotus,” criticizing the show’s depiction as “simply goes too far.” The series features the Ratliff family—father Timothy (Jason Isaacs) and son Saxon (Patrick Schwarzenegger)—both proud Duke alumni. In one controversial scene, Timothy contemplates suicide while wearing a Duke T-shirt, a portrayal that has raised significant concerns.
Frank Tramble, Duke’s Vice President for Communications, Marketing, and Public Affairs, addressed the issue, stating that the misuse of the university’s logo in such a context does not align with Duke’s values. He emphasized that the depiction undermines the institution’s efforts to promote mental health awareness, particularly given the sensitive nature of suicide, which remains a leading cause of death among college students.
Despite Duke’s objections, legal experts note that the artistic use of trademarks is generally protected under the First Amendment. Jeanne Fromer, an intellectual property law professor, explained that creative expressions in media often have the right to use such trademarks, even if the portrayal is negative. This legal perspective suggests that while Duke’s concerns are understandable, the show’s creators may be within their rights to feature the university’s brand in this manner.
This incident is not unique; other brands have faced similar portrayals in media. For instance, Peloton reacted to its depiction in “And Just Like That…” and Pepperdine University unsuccessfully sued Netflix and Warner Bros. over their portrayals. These cases highlight the complex intersection of intellectual property rights and creative expression in entertainment.
The inclusion of Duke University in “The White Lotus” serves as a focal point for discussions about brand representation in media. The show’s writers chose to feature the university, incorporating elements of the longstanding rivalry between Duke and the University of North Carolina (UNC). The Ratliff family’s dynamic includes debates over their children’s college choices, with references to both institutions, reflecting the deep-seated competition and pride associated with these universities.
While some viewers may appreciate the nuanced portrayal of university culture and rivalries, others, particularly those affiliated with Duke, may find the depiction offensive or damaging. This contrast underscores the challenges media creators face when incorporating real-world institutions and brands into fictional narratives, especially when the portrayals are negative or controversial.
In response to Duke’s concerns, HBO has declined to comment, maintaining a stance of non-disclosure regarding the issue. This silence leaves the debate open-ended, with stakeholders on both sides holding firm to their positions.
The controversy invites broader conversations about the responsibilities of media producers in handling real-world affiliations and trademarks. It also prompts reflection on how such portrayals can impact public perception and the reputations of the institutions involved. As discussions continue, the balance between creative freedom and respect for institutional identities remains a delicate and complex issue in the realm of entertainment.
