Indie filmmaker Natalie Jasmine Harris has accused former first daughter Malia Obama of blatantly plagiarizing scenes from her award-winning short film for a high-profile Nike commercial, highlighting yet another example of how the Obama family leverages their political privilege to gain unfair advantages in the private sector.
Key Takeaways
- Indie filmmaker Natalie Jasmine Harris claims Malia Obama’s Nike commercial contains scenes “shockingly similar” to her 2024 short film “Grace,” particularly a scene featuring two young Black girls playing pat-a-cake.
- Harris shared side-by-side comparisons highlighting remarkable similarities in framing, lighting, pacing, shot list, and color palette between her work and Obama’s commercial.
- Despite Malia Obama’s previous attempts to distance herself from her famous last name, critics suggest this controversy exposes how celebrity offspring continue to receive opportunities based on name recognition rather than merit.
- The plagiarism allegations emerged shortly after both filmmakers met at the Sundance Film Festival, where Harris’s film competed alongside Obama’s directorial debut.
- Malia Obama has not responded to the allegations, while Nike remains silent about their decision to hire the former first daughter over independent artists with original vision.
Independent Filmmaker Exposes Striking Similarities
The controversy erupted when filmmaker Natalie Jasmine Harris released detailed comparisons between her critically acclaimed short film ‘Grace’ and Malia Obama’s directorial debut for Nike. Harris provided evidence showing nearly identical visual elements, focusing particularly on scenes featuring young Black girls playing pat-a-cake. The filmmaker emphasized that the similarities go far beyond the game itself, extending to the technical and artistic choices that define the visual storytelling.
“It’s not about the game. It’s about the cinematic tools used to depict it,” said Natalie Jasmine Harris.
Harris shared a side-by-side video comparison on social media that meticulously documented the striking resemblances in framing, lighting, pacing, shot selection, and color palette between her original work and Obama’s Nike commercial. The similarities were so pronounced that many viewers immediately recognized what appeared to be obvious imitation rather than coincidental artistic overlap, leading to widespread support for Harris within independent filmmaking circles.
Malia Obama accused of plagiarism.https://t.co/JSe8uJw7ly pic.twitter.com/jxSQCZZKhv
— Tony Seruga (@TonySeruga) May 18, 2025
Another Case of Liberal Elite Privilege
The Nike commercial featuring ‘The A’One’ sneaker debuted on May 6 across SNKRS platform and TikTok, quickly drawing attention not for its artistic merit but for its apparent appropriation of another artist’s vision. This controversy emerged despite Malia Obama’s previous public statements expressing a desire to drop her last name to avoid being labeled a ‘nepo baby’ – industry slang for those who benefit from nepotism based on family connections rather than talent or hard work.
“If brands want a certain look, why not hire from the source instead of for name recognition?” questioned Natalie Jasmine Harris.
Harris and Obama reportedly met at the Sundance Film Festival, where Harris’s ‘Grace’ – a coming-of-age story that had received significant acclaim on the independent circuit – competed alongside Obama’s directorial debut. The timing raises serious questions about whether Obama had direct knowledge of Harris’s work before creating the Nike commercial. While Harris directed her criticism primarily at industry practices rather than personally attacking Obama, the circumstances suggest a troubling pattern of elite liberal connections trumping artistic integrity.
Industry Impact and Broader Implications
This controversy highlights a persistent problem in creative industries where companies like Nike repeatedly choose established names and political connections over genuine talent and original vision. While independent filmmakers struggle for recognition despite producing innovative work, those with famous last names continue receiving lucrative opportunities regardless of their artistic merit or originality. The silence from both Nike and Malia Obama speaks volumes about accountability in liberal-dominated industries.
“It’s devastating. I know art overlaps, but when you pour your heart into telling stories with care and barely get recognition, it stings,” said Natalie Jasmine Harris.
Harris further articulated the systemic issue at play: It speaks to a larger issue of brands not supporting independent artists and opting for folks who already have name recognition, which doesn’t breed innovative films or original storytelling. This incident exemplifies how the children of Democratic politicians continue leveraging their family connections for personal gain while preaching about equality and opportunity for all. President Trump has consistently highlighted this hypocrisy among liberal elites who claim to champion ordinary Americans while ensuring special privileges for themselves and their families.
The only reason seasoned director #MaliaObama got a gig directing a commercial for @Nike is because of her last name.
Like other #DEI and nepotism hires, lack of originality and/or outright plagiarism occurs often. pic.twitter.com/Yp4IJDJofV— Black & Right (@BobParksBnR) May 15, 2025
As this story continues to develop, the lack of response from Malia Obama only reinforces the perception that the Obama family believes they are above accountability. This controversy serves as yet another reminder of the stark difference between liberal rhetoric about equality and the reality of how political connections create an uneven playing field across American industries – from Hollywood to corporate America to the arts.
