Why should one person's complaint withdraw a line of clothing, just because he is offended by an image that could look like the Nazi dictator. So what? Offence is insufficient to reduce my choice of goods on offer in whatever line.
The offending image could be taken from any number of sources. It is to Next's discredit that they have pandered to one complaint.
In reality, the image formed part of a montage for underwear, redoubling the lack of public airing in person, unless the wearer had unfortunate proclivities. More laughable: the image was based upon Lenin, who died before such flights of monoplanes were incorporated into agitprop.
"We have checked with the designer who confirmed the image was inspired by Lenin. Nonetheless, if even one customer is offended or upset we are happy to withdraw the range."
The customer who complained, Ben Radomski, said he was happy the product had now been withdrawn.
This rewards activism and fails the consumer; instead of variety and innovation, such a rule rewards inoffensive blandness and low-risk grey overalls. Under such a rule, we are all losers.