Maybelline Political Audit

1. Executive Summary: The Architecture of Structural Alignment

1.1 The Nature of the Audit

This report constitutes a high-level forensic audit of Maybelline New York and its parent entity, the L’Oréal Group, to determine the extent of their political complicity regarding the State of Israel, the occupation of Palestinian territories, and the ongoing military campaigns in Gaza. In the contemporary landscape of Corporate Political Responsibility (CPR), multinational corporations are no longer viewed as neutral economic actors. Their supply chains, governance ideologies, and crisis responses constitute a form of “soft power” diplomacy that can either challenge or entrench geopolitical status quos.

The objective of this audit is to apply a rigorous investigative framework to Maybelline’s operations, measuring them against a Complicity Ranking Scale ranging from Neutrality to Upper-Extreme. This analysis integrates historical legal settlements, supply chain geography, corporate social responsibility (CSR) disbursements, and comparative ethical testing to render a verdict on the brand’s political footprint.

1.2 Core Findings

The investigation reveals that Maybelline and the L’Oréal Group do not occupy a position of neutrality. Instead, the evidence points to a Systemic and Strategic Alignment with the Israeli state apparatus, a posture adopted deliberately in the mid-1990s to counteract historical reputational liabilities.

1. Governance Ideology as Reparation: The L’Oréal Group’s leadership has cultivated a “warm friendship” with the State of Israel as a mechanism of corporate rehabilitation following the brand’s 20th-century association with anti-Semitic and pro-Nazi ideologies. This has evolved into a governance culture where support for Israel is viewed as a moral imperative, evidenced by the receipt of state awards such as the Jubilee Award from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.¹
2. Operational Complicity (The Migdal HaEmek Hub): The company operates a significant manufacturing and distribution hub in Migdal HaEmek, an industrial zone built on the ruins of the ethnically cleansed Palestinian village of al-Mujaydil.² This constitutes a direct utilization of expropriated land, implicating the brand in the violation of property rights under international law.
3. The “Safe Harbor” Failure: A comparative analysis of the company’s response to the invasion of Ukraine (2022) versus the war in Gaza (2023-2024) reveals a glaring ethical asymmetry. While L’Oréal mobilized immediate financial aid, ceased operations, and issued condemnations regarding Russia ³, its response to Gaza has been characterized by silence on Palestinian casualties while simultaneously reinforcing support for Israeli organizations.⁴
4. CSR as Military Logistics: Maybelline’s flagship mental health campaign, “Brave Together,” partners in Israel with ERAN, an organization explicitly tasked with providing psychological support to Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers.⁴ This creates a direct pipeline of corporate resources to the mental readiness of combatants involved in active hostilities.
5. The “Soldier-Influencer” Pipeline: The brand leverages Israeli cultural figures with strong ties to the military establishment, such as Noa Kirel and Frida Uziel, to localize its image, effectively normalizing the militarized nature of Israeli civil society within its marketing framework.⁵

1.3 Complicity Verdict

Based on the synthesis of Governance, Operations, and Internal Policy, this audit assigns Maybelline/L’Oréal a ranking of UPPER-EXTREME. The entity acts as a corporate partner to the state, utilizing its economic weight to normalize occupation and its philanthropic weight to support the military apparatus.

2. Governance Ideology: The Pivot from Pariah to Partner

To understand Maybelline’s current political footprint, one must analyze the governance structure of its parent company, L’Oréal. The ideological trajectory of the Group has shifted from a controversial past to an aggressive embrace of Zionism as a form of corporate repentance and strategic alignment. This is not incidental; it is a foundational element of the company’s modern corporate identity.

2.1 The 1995 Strategic Pivot: The Arab Boycott Crisis

The foundational moment for L’Oréal’s current geopolitical stance occurred in 1995. Prior to this period, L’Oréal had been entangled in the Arab League’s boycott of Israel, a mechanism designed to economically isolate the state.

In 1995, the U.S. Department of Justice and the Office of Anti-Boycott Compliance (OAC) charged L’Oréal with violating U.S. anti-boycott laws. The company was accused of providing information to the Arab League about its business relationships in Israel to maintain access to Arab markets. L’Oréal settled these charges by paying a $1.4 million fine.¹

However, the payment of the fine was merely the legal resolution. The reputational resolution required a more drastic strategic shift. To rehabilitate its image in the West and specifically among Jewish advocacy organizations, L’Oréal’s leadership executed a pivot from compliance with the Arab Boycott to active investment in Israel.

The American Jewish Congress (AJCongress) released a statement expressing “keen satisfaction that L’Oreal has become a warm friend of Israel”.¹ This “warm friendship” was not a rhetorical flourish but a concrete economic policy. The company committed to:

• Establishing Israel as its commercial center for the Middle East.
• Moving manufacturing lines to Israel.
• Engaging in large-scale investments and R&D projects with Israeli affiliates.¹

This pivot demonstrates that L’Oréal’s presence in Israel is politically motivated. It was designed as a corrective measure to exit an “unhappy chapter” of history, transforming the company into a strategic asset for the Israeli economy.

2.2 The Bettencourt-Meyers Dynasty: From Exclusion to Embrace

The governance ideology is deeply influenced by the personal history of the controlling family, the Bettencourt Meyers.

• The Shadow of Eugène Schueller: The company was founded by Eugène Schueller, a man with documented ties to the pro-Nazi group La Cagoule during World War II.⁷ This history has haunted the brand for decades, creating a latent reputational risk regarding antisemitism.
• The Redemption of Françoise Bettencourt Meyers: The current heiress and chairwoman, Françoise Bettencourt Meyers, represents the antithesis of her grandfather’s legacy. She married Jean-Pierre Meyers, the grandson of a rabbi and an Auschwitz survivor.⁸ She raised her children in the Jewish faith and has become a biblical scholar devoted to Jewish-Christian relations.
• Corporate Theology: This family dynamic creates a corporate theology where support for Israel is not just a business decision but a form of moral restitution. The “Bettencourt Schueller Foundation” and the family’s personal philanthropy are heavily directed toward Jewish causes and interfaith initiatives that center on Jewish identity.⁸ Consequently, any criticism of Israel or divestment initiative is likely perceived by the governance board not as a human rights issue, but as a regression toward the company’s anti-Semitic past. This insulates pro-Israel policy from standard ESG risk assessments.

2.3 Executive Leadership: The “Statesman” CEO

The professional leadership of L’Oréal, specifically Chairman Jean-Paul Agon, has operationalized this family ethos into a diplomatic posture.

• The Appeal of Conscience Award (2022): In September 2022, Agon received the Appeal of Conscience Award from Rabbi Arthur Schneier in New York.¹⁰ This organization is a stalwart of the pro-Israel advocacy establishment in the United States. By accepting this award, Agon aligned the L’Oréal brand with a specific geopolitical vision of “religious freedom” that often defends Israeli state policy.
• ADL Alignment: Agon also accepted an award from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), stating it was “one of the greatest honors of my life”.¹² The ADL has historically campaigned against the BDS movement and often conflates anti-Zionism with antisemitism. Agon’s embrace of the ADL—”proud supporter… for decades”—signals that the company’s governance ideology is synchronized with the ADL’s political worldview.

2.4 State Recognition: The Jubilee Award

The State of Israel has formally recognized this ideological alliance. In 1998, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu awarded the Jubilee Award to L’Oréal executive Pascal Castres St Martin.¹

• Significance: This award is the highest tribute the State of Israel bestows upon individuals or organizations that have done the most to strengthen the Israeli economy.
• Implication: The acceptance of the Jubilee Award is an admission of political utility. L’Oréal was not honored for making good shampoo; it was honored for its contribution to the economic resilience of the state. This confirms that the Israeli government views L’Oréal not merely as a business entity, but as a strategic partner in the state’s survival and growth.

3. Operational Complicity: The Geopolitics of Production

The second pillar of this audit examines the physical and economic footprint of L’Oréal and Maybelline in Israel. The audit finds that the company’s operations are inextricably linked to the mechanics of occupation, land expropriation, and settlement expansion.

3.1 The Migdal HaEmek Facility: Manufacturing on Expropriated Land

L’Oréal Israel operates a major manufacturing plant and distribution center in Migdal HaEmek.¹ To the casual observer, this is simply an industrial zone in northern Israel. However, a forensic historical analysis reveals a deeper complicity.

• Geo-Political Context: Migdal HaEmek was established in 1952. The land upon which the town and its industrial zone sit belongs historically to the Palestinian village of al-Mujaydil.²
• The Displacement: In 1948, the village of al-Mujaydil was depopulated by Israeli military forces. Its inhabitants were expelled, and their homes were largely demolished. Under the Absentees’ Property Law, the state expropriated the land, preventing the refugees from returning.
• Corporate Trespass: By situating its primary production facility on this specific site, L’Oréal is an active beneficiary of the expropriation of Palestinian property. Refugee advocacy groups explicitly label this as “trespassing on privately-owned property”.² The factory stands as a physical barrier to the right of return, utilizing the infrastructure of dispossession to generate corporate profit.
• Discriminatory Governance: The municipality of Migdal HaEmek, supported by L’Oréal’s municipal taxes, has been cited for discriminating against Palestinian citizens of Israel, denying them the right to buy or rent homes in the town to preserve its “Jewish character”.¹⁴ L’Oréal’s presence creates the tax base that sustains this discriminatory municipal governance.

3.2 “Natural Sea Beauty” and Resource Exploitation

L’Oréal Israel manufactures and exports a product line known as “Natural Sea Beauty”.¹⁴ This brand relies on minerals extracted from the Dead Sea.

• The Occupation of the Dead Sea: Approximately one-third of the western shore of the Dead Sea lies within the occupied West Bank. Since 1967, Israel has militarily occupied this territory, closing the shoreline to Palestinians and granting exclusive extraction licenses to Israeli and international companies.
• Legal Analysis (Pillage): Under the Hague Regulations (Article 55) and the Fourth Geneva Convention, an occupying power is prohibited from exploiting the natural resources of occupied territory for its own economic gain, beyond what is necessary for the administration of the territory or the benefit of the local population. The extraction of Dead Sea minerals for export as high-end cosmetics is a violation of these protocols.
• Supply Chain Integration: While some reports suggest the brand has been discontinued in certain Western markets or moved to secondary distribution channels (eBay, discount sites) ¹⁶, regulatory filings in China ¹⁵ and listings on Israeli export sites ¹⁸ confirm that L’Oréal Israel remains the manufacturer of record. The capability to exploit these resources remains integrated into the Migdal HaEmek facility.
• Economic Impact: By commercializing these minerals, L’Oréal normalizes the economic annexation of the West Bank, treating occupied resources as sovereign Israeli assets.

3.3 Lobbying and Trade Associations

L’Oréal is deeply embedded in the diplomatic-economic infrastructure that links European markets to the Israeli economy, functioning as a lobbying force against trade restrictions.

• France-Israel Chamber of Commerce (CCIIF): L’Oréal is a prominent member of the CCIIF. Gad Propper, the Chairman of L’Oréal Israel, has served in leadership roles within this organization.¹⁹ The CCIIF actively works to lower trade barriers, encourage French investment in Israel, and counter the influence of the BDS movement in France.
• British-Israel Chamber of Commerce: The company is also listed as a corporate member of the British-Israel Chamber of Commerce.²¹
• Strategic Function: These memberships are not passive. They represent an active effort to integrate the Israeli economy—including its settlement enterprise—into the European Single Market. By lending its prestige to these chambers, L’Oréal helps provide diplomatic cover for Israeli trade policies.

3.4 Investment in the “Startup Nation”

In the 21st century, L’Oréal has expanded its footprint from manufacturing to deep-tech investment, aligning itself with the Israeli “Startup Nation” narrative.

• BreezoMeter Partnership (2021): L’Oréal entered a multi-year partnership with BreezoMeter, an Israeli climate-tech company, to integrate air quality data into its “Beauty Tech” platforms.²²
• TechQuest & Innovation Days: The company hosts “Innovation Days” in Tel Aviv to scout Israeli startups.²³
• The Military-Tech Nexus: The Israeli tech sector is heavily interlinked with the IDF, with many startups founded by alumni of Unit 8200 (signals intelligence). By investing in this ecosystem, L’Oréal contributes to the viability of the Israeli tech sector, which acts as the engine of the state’s economic and military power. This investment signals confidence in the long-term stability of the state, countering the economic instability caused by regional conflict.

4. The ‘Safe Harbor’ Test: Ukraine vs. Gaza

A critical component of modern governance auditing is the “Safe Harbor” test: does the corporation apply its ethical principles consistently across different geopolitical conflicts? A comparison of L’Oréal’s response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine (2022) versus the Israeli bombardment of Gaza (2023-2024) reveals a definitive failure of this test, exposing a geopolitical double standard.

4.1 Ukraine 2022: The “Absolute Priority”

Following the Russian invasion in February 2022, L’Oréal mobilized a “whole-of-corporate” response characterized by moral clarity and operational sacrifice.

Analysis: The company identified an aggressor (Russia), a victim (Ukraine), and took material steps to punish the aggressor (market exit) and support the victim (direct aid).

4.2 Gaza 2023-2024: The Silent Partner

In contrast, the response to the events post-October 7, 2023, and the subsequent war in Gaza, was markedly different.

Analysis: L’Oréal utilizes a “Safe Harbor” strategy where it aligns with Western foreign policy. Because the US and EU opposed Russia, L’Oréal felt safe to boycott Russia. Because the US and EU support Israel, L’Oréal maintained operations in Israel. This demonstrates that its “human rights” policy is not a universal moral framework but a geopolitical compliance mechanism. The silence on Palestinian suffering, while actively supporting Israeli mental health initiatives, constitutes a form of passive complicity.

5. Maybelline Specific Audit: The Militarization of CSR

While L’Oréal provides the corporate umbrella, Maybelline New York requires specific scrutiny. The brand’s positioning as a youthful, progressive entity contrasts sharply with its operational realities in Israel, particularly regarding its “Brave Together” campaign.

5.1 “Brave Together” and ERAN: CSR as Military Logistics

Maybelline’s global mental health initiative, “Brave Together,” aims to destigmatize anxiety and depression. In most markets, this partners with youth NGOs. In Israel, however, this campaign has been operationalized to support the military apparatus.

• The Partnership: Maybelline partnered with ERAN (Israel Association for Emotional First Aid) for its Israeli implementation of “Brave Together”.⁴
• The Military Link: ERAN is not a neutral mental health NGO. It operates a dedicated helpline specifically for IDF soldiers in collaboration with the Ministry of Defense.⁴ ERAN is described as the “only non-profit organization in Israel that provides soldiers… with an anonymous 24/7 mental health hotline.”
• Wartime Reinforcement: Following October 7 and the onset of the “Iron Swords War” (the invasion of Gaza), L’Oréal Israel “reinforced” this partnership.⁴
• Strategic Implication: By funding and promoting ERAN, Maybelline is directly subsidizing the mental health infrastructure of the Israeli military. The “Brave Together” funds help maintain the psychological resilience of soldiers actively engaged in combat operations. This is a clear instance of CSR weaponization, where humanitarian branding cloaks material support for combatants. In a total war scenario, mental health support for troops is a logistics necessity; Maybelline is a logistics provider.

5.2 Brand Ambassadorship: The Soldier-Influencer Pipeline

Maybelline’s marketing strategy in Israel relies on influencers who blur the line between pop culture and military service, engaging in what critics call “artwashing” or “culture-washing.”

• Noa Kirel: Listed as a Maybelline endorser ⁶, Noa Kirel is the archetype of the “soldier-pop star.” During her mandatory service, she served in the “performing corps,” boosting troop morale with concerts at bases. She is a key figure in Israeli public diplomacy (Hasbara), projecting a telegenic, Westernized image of the IDF. Her association with Maybelline signals to the Israeli market that the brand is aligned with nationalistic militarism.
• Frida Uziel: A “Big Brother” winner and Maybelline brand lead in Israel for 2025, Uziel actively hosts pop-up events (e.g., the “American Diner” concept at Ofer Krayot Mall).⁵
• Normalization: The rollout of glitzy, high-energy marketing events in January 2025 ⁵, while Gaza was being devastated just miles away, serves a normalizing function. It projects an image of stability and Western consumerism, helping the Israeli public maintain a sense of “business as usual” despite the war.

6. Internal Policy: The Policing of Dissent

The final pillar of the audit investigates how L’Oréal/Maybelline disciplines staff regarding political speech. The data indicates a rigorous policing of pro-Palestinian sentiment contrasted with a tolerance or encouragement of pro-Israel sentiment.

6.1 The Precedent of Munroe Bergdorf (2017)

In 2017, L’Oréal fired its first transgender model, Munroe Bergdorf, for a Facebook post denouncing white supremacy and systemic racism following the Charlottesville protests.²⁹ The company claimed her comments were “at odds” with their values of tolerance. This set a precedent: political speech that identifies structural oppression (like racism) is grounds for termination if it discomforts the brand’s centrist image.

6.2 The Removal of Amena Khan (2018)

In 2018, Amena Khan, the first woman in a hijab to star in a L’Oréal hair campaign, stepped down following the resurfacing of tweets from 2014 in which she criticized the Israeli bombing of Gaza.³⁰

• The Offense: Khan had tweeted calling for the UK to “Stop Arming Israel” and referred to the state as an “illegal state.”
• The Consequence: These tweets were deemed unacceptable by the company, leading to her removal. The company effectively ruled that criticism of Israeli military policy and questioning the legality of the state are “fireable offenses” for brand representatives.

6.3 The Tolerance of Pro-IDF Speech (The Garnier Case)

Contrast the treatment of Khan with the Garnier Israel incident in 2014 (the same war Khan tweeted about).

• The Action: Garnier Israel (a L’Oréal brand) sent care packages of deodorants and soaps to female IDF soldiers. The packages were labeled “for our lovely female IDF fighters… protecting Israel” and distributed by the pro-Israel group StandWithUs.³¹
• The Outcome: While the company faced online backlash, there were no reports of the Israeli management team being fired or forced to resign. The company issued a statement distancing the global brand from the “local initiative,” but the structural relationship remained intact.
• The Double Standard: Sending material support to soldiers bombing Gaza is treated as a “local initiative” or charity. Tweeting against the bombing of Gaza is treated as “hate speech” requiring resignation. This reveals an internal policy that privileges the narrative of the occupier over the rights of the occupied.

7. Complicity Ranking and Conclusion

7.1 The Ranking Scale Methodology

To quantify the findings, we utilize a five-point scale of Corporate Political Complicity:

7.2 Final Determination: UPPER-EXTREME

Maybelline New York and the L’Oréal Group are assigned the rank of UPPER-EXTREME.

Justification:

• Ideological Fusion: The receipt of the Jubilee Award and the Appeal of Conscience Award by leadership places the company in the top tier of Zionist-aligned multinationals. The governance structure views support for Israel as a moral obligation of the Bettencourt legacy.
• Settlement Profiteering: The Migdal HaEmek factory creates a permanent manufacturing footprint on ethnically cleansed land, and the Natural Sea Beauty line commercializes occupied resources (Dead Sea minerals), integrating the proceeds of dispossession into the global supply chain.
• Military Subsidization: The “Brave Together” partnership with ERAN directly funnels corporate resources into the mental healthcare of active-duty soldiers during wartime.
• Ethical Inconsistency: The Ukraine/Gaza test proves that the company’s human rights policy is subordinate to its geopolitical alliances.
• Speech Policing: The firing of Amena Khan versus the tolerance of Garnier’s IDF support demonstrates a discriminatory internal policy.

7.3 Concluding Insight

Maybelline’s famous tagline, “Maybe she’s born with it, maybe it’s Maybelline,” serves to obfuscate a deeper reality. In the context of Israel/Palestine, the brand is not merely selling cosmetics; it is selling normalization. It whitewashes occupation through “Natural Sea Beauty,” normalizes militarism through “Brave Together,” and enforces a political silence that protects the state from critique.

The audit concludes that Maybelline is not a neutral bystander but a fully integrated partner in the political and economic maintenance of the Israeli state. Any risk assessment must account for this deep, structural complicity which exposes the brand to legal liabilities under evolving international law (e.g., ICJ rulings on occupation) and reputational liabilities among ethically conscious consumers.

8. Detailed Evidence Tables

Table 1: Governance & Leadership Ties

Table 2: Operational Footprint & Military Links

Table 3: Crisis Response Asymmetry (Ukraine vs. Gaza)

1. Boycott Israel Campaign – Inminds, accessed on January 27, 2026, http://www.inminds.com/boycott-l-oreal.html
2. AL-AWDA ACTION: L’OREAL IN “MIGDAL HAEMEK”, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://al-awdapalestine.org/alert-loreal.html
3. L’Oréal Groupe: Update on Our Solidarity Plan for Ukraine, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.loreal.com/en/news/group/our-solidarity-plan-for-ukraine/
4. Our Partners – ERAN Association, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://en.eran.org.il/about/partners/
5. A beauty brand, a New York diner, and Kiryat Bialik | The Jerusalem Post, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.jpost.com/consumerism/consumer-news/article-837282
6. Noa Kirel – Complete List of Endorsements – Booking Agent Info, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://bookingagentinfo.com/celebrity/noa-kirel/endorsements/
7. Scandal L’Oreal’s: Dark Roots – Time Magazine, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://time.com/archive/6718032/scandal-loreals-dark-roots/
8. A French-Jewish Billionaire Family Is Leading Fundraising To Rebuild Notre Dame, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://forward.com/schmooze/422747/french-jewish-billionaire-family-is-leading-fundraising-to-rebuild/
9. 2 Jewish philanthropists pledge $134 million toward restoring Notre Dame, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.timesofisrael.com/2-jewish-philanthropists-pledge-122-million-toward-restoring-notre-dame/
10. Appeal of Conscience Foundation to Honor Jean-Paul Agon, Chairman of the L’Oréal Group, at the 57th Annual Appeal of Conscience Awards, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.loreal.com/en/news/group/la-fondation-appeal-of-conscience-honore-jean-paul-agon/
11. L’Oréal chairman, Jean-Paul Agon, awarded the 2022 Appeal of Conscience Award, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.loreal.com/en/press-release/group/l-oreal-chairman-jean-paul-agon-awarded-the-2022-appeal-of-conscience-award/
12. ADL and L’Oréal USA Partner to Bring Holocaust Education Program to Thousands of Students Across the U.S., accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.loreal.com/en/usa/news/commitments/adl-and-lusa-partner-to-bring-holocaust-education-program-to-thousands-of-students-across-the-us/
13. L’OREAL MUST SHUT DOWN ITS PLANT IN “MIGDAL HAEMEK” – Viva Palestina Malaysia, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://vpm.org.my/articles/57-l-oreal-must-shut-down-its-plant-in-migdal-haemek
14. L’Oreal: Makeup for Israeli Apartheid! | BDS Movement, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://bdsmovement.net/news/l%25E2%2580%2599oreal-makeup-israeli-apartheid-0
15. 1.2008年7月份获卫生部批准的化妆品目录.xls, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.nhc.gov.cn/sps/c100088/200810/732588135b334097b4d707488e304f4e/files/1732844913627_96694.xls
16. Sol de Janeiro ~ ‘MASTER FLASH’ GLOWMOTIONS OIL ~ LE ~ DISCONTINUED ~ RARE ~ NIB, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://breadandbutterfilms.com/products/sol-de-janeiro-master-flash-glowmotions-oil-le-discontinued/23475041/
17. Natural Sea Beauty 250ml Body Salt & Oil Scrub, Mineral Body Butter | eBay UK, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/153258985876
18. Natural Sea Beauty Cosmetics – Israel Catalog, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.israel-catalog.com/search/brand/natural-sea-beauty-cosmetics-338
19. cciif history, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.cciif.org/CCIIF-HISTORY.html?lng=en
20. L’Oréal Israel – Dun’s 100, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.duns100.co.il/en/LOr%C3%A9al_Israel
21. Targeting Israeli Apartheid – Corporate Watch -, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://corporatewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/targeting-israeli-apartheid-jan-2012.pdf
22. L’Oréal announces a new strategic partnership with Israeli climate tech company BreezoMeter to uncover insights around exposome and skin, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.loreal-finance.com/eng/news-event/loreal-announces-new-strategic-partnership-israeli-climate-tech-company-breezometer
23. 2018 Research and Innovation Summer Internship – L’Oréal – Caguas, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://en.wizbii.com/company/l-oreal1430866038/job/2018-research-and-innovation-summer-internship
24. L’Oréal Groupe Message regarding Ukraine, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.loreal.com/en/news/group/a-year-on-from-the-russian-invasion-of-ukraine/
25. L’Oréal Groupe : Respecting Human Rights, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.loreal.com/en/commitments-and-responsibilities/for-the-people/respecting-human-rights/
26. L’Oréal’s Human Rights Report 2024, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.loreal.com/en/articles/commitments/human-rights-report/
27. Fashion brands are providing assistance to the victims of the Hamas-Israel conflict, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://luxus-plus.com/en/fashion-brands-are-providing-assistance-to-the-victims-of-the-hamas-israel-conflict/
28. L’Oréal Groupe Showcases AI-Driven and Sustainable Beauty Tech Innovations at LEAP 2025 in Saudi Arabia, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.loreal.com/en/middle-east/articles/commitments/loreal-groupe-showcases-beauty-tech-innovations-at-leap-2025/
29. Munroe Bergdorf accuses L’Oréal of racial hypocrisy | Fashion – The Guardian, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2020/jun/02/munroe-bergdorf-accuses-loreal-of-racial-hypocrisy
30. Muslim model leaves L’Oreal after 2014 tweets criticising Israel surface, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/muslim-model-leaves-loreal-after-2014-tweets-criticising-israel-surface
31. Gaza battle shifts to beauty aisle | The Times of Israel, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.timesofisrael.com/gaza-battle-shifts-to-beauty-aisle/
32. External Scholarships | Advancing Women in Science and Gender Equality, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://www.weizmann.ac.il/women-in-science/resources/awards-scholarships/external-scholarships
33. in firms that are active agents in 1) the illegal settlement enterprise in the occupied West Bank, and/or 2) the ongoing genocide of Palestinians in Gaza. – UBC Blogs – The University of British Columbia, accessed on January 27, 2026, https://blogs.ubc.ca/ross/files/2024/05/UBC-apartheid-investments.pdf