Diet Prada, a once-secret but now the infamous watchdog account, has made numerous headlines in today's fashion industry. With two million followers, Diet Prada has garnered attention beyond the eyes of fashion activists and influencers.

As consumers and viewers demand more transparency and integrity, Diet Prada continues to partake in calling out big-time designers and companies for copying independent brands while integrating them with present-day social, environmental and political issues.

Michelle Maryam, founder and designer of Maryallé, is one of the few that knows about Diet Prada, "I think they are the most influential, sharp and ruthless fashion watchdog in the industry today. They democratised the ethics of the fashion industry, and they really make fashion brands ‘think’ more than ever before."

“I know Diet Prada existed, but never followed them until just recently. I feel some topics are an exaggeration or accusation and aimed only at certain and/or specific parties, nonetheless they do touch on some interesting topics,” said Vannya Istarinda, designer of Dua Awan Studios.

“I do know Diet Prada. In my opinion, every person or community has the right to speak out, so does the community that has the responsibility to create without limits,” said celebrity-turned-designer Tities Sapoetra.

Similarly, Indonesian fashion watchdog @socialsymptom has also called out local designers and fashion magazines that plagiarised and stole designs and content from international designers, creatives and the pop culture.

The account stopped posting in 2018, but it made a buzz in the industry. @socialsymptom called out in house brand Sapto Djojokartiko for taking clear cut references from Valentino's Resort 2016 collection that is in and of itself deemed as controversial.

Valentino took inspiration from African tribes by using the unique Kikuyu textile. Their belts were made from African trade beads, and they used tribal African motifs, embroidery and embellishment on their accessories and clothes.

What Valentino did is cultural appropriation and many have spoken out about their issue with this: Cultural appropriation takes without giving. To steal an item that belongs to a group of people that has such deep embedded meaning towards its community and turning it into decoration as a means to sell at an eye-watering price is, in fact, problematic as it strips away its cultural identity and heritage.

During an interview, Sapto said, "The inspiration of this collection is the spiritual journey of humans and their yearning to find their creator...it is usually found in tradition, symbols, and rituals.."

Watchdogs could be beneficial in pointing out the flaws within the industry and laying out the corporation or the brand’s inconsistency in terms of originality and ethics.

As for the condition of the fashion industry in Indonesia, Michelle expressed her apprehension and stated that there is a need of fashion watchdogs because, "There are so many Indonesian fashion brands right now. What is concerning is the fact that most of them don't care about identity and originality."

In Calla The Label founder Yeri Afriani's view, "I think it's 50:50. You need it, but you also don't need it depending on the function and purpose. Diet Prada is like a police, but then again, Indonesians are quite ignorant.”

Vannya, on the other hand, disagreed. ”No, I don't think so, at least not at the moment. I support local brands and designers that are not imitation brands or selling ‘fakes.’ I do believe a majority of them take inspiration from other designers and turn it to something different and unique. For example, I believe there are many Indonesian designers and brands that look into the Western world for inspiration, but it doesn't mean they are copying - unless they are precisely mimicking the product. Being in the fashion industry, you will always be hungry for new design inspiration and styles, and you would want a taste of something that is inaccessible, different or new. That’s why designers will take inspiration from others."

Another watchdog account @Givecredit_ does an excellent job in educating their readers and raising awareness about the industry's sources of inspiration - specifically in cultural appropriation. Instead of calling out plagiarism and knockoffs, they mainly aim to raise awareness of giving credit where credit is due.

They call on brands to be more conscious of outsourcing their designs, especially when they redistribute items or styles with sentimental and generational values that have taken years of craftsmanship.

A watchdog can also protect emerging designers from companies profiting off design knockoffs. In this case, fast fashion companies are the most prolific offender. Fast fashion could easily expand their market by blatantly replicating original designs. The rapid mass production method allows them to sell the knockoffs at a more affordable price than the original.

One of the notorious cases is when Zara copied indie designer Tuesday Bassen’s badges and patches designs. When Bassen fought back, Zara said the lack of distinctiveness of Bassen’s design “makes it very hard to see how a significant part of the population anywhere in the world would associate the signs with Tuesday Bassen.”

Evidently, for emerging designers, this goes beyond their monetary loss being challenged. In this case, having a watchdog could give young and fresh designers the support they need – so that they can gain exposure, which ultimately reinforces the practice of crediting the original designers.

Gone are the days of cherry-picking which to show and which to conceal behind the horrible ways clothes are manufactured. Now more than ever, sustainability has become a hot topic, and it's made partially possible by watchdogs.

However, the downside of watchdogs is their anonymity. Some of their claims can be a stretch. If they do expect the public to chime in and help them uncover the lies, they may cherry-pick the information and post it anyway without fact-checking it.

Tities Sapoetra said, "There are better ways to criticise without hurting people's feelings. However, giving constructive criticism or straight-up calling someone out with malicious intent is a choice."

A more significant issue is whether they should be allowed to keep their anonymity. There are legal pitfalls like defamation, invasion of privacy, or copyright infringement.

"Being anonymous might not help one avoid liability, as the right to freedom of expression needs to be proportional to other interests, such as crime prevention or protection of one's reputation. There are various legal steps of defeating the anonymity of a person or entity, and the approaches vary from country to country," said fashion attorney Anna Radke.

Yet, the question of whether or not Indonesian designers will be ready for this still prevails.

"I would probably stay silent, mostly because I think that if I replied, it would turn into a senseless debate where there would be no end but more drama. I think it could be a warning for other designers and me to be more creative and wiser in implementing our ‘references.’ As for my design team, I do have people who have vast knowledge in the history of [fashion], but then again, sometimes we fall short, and we forget so. Therefore, it can be a problem." Yeri stated.

Keeping up with fashion is no easy feat. Fashion vigilantes could serve as a bully but also as a blessing in disguise. As fashion continues to grow in Indonesia, and consumers continue to evolve their values and beliefs over time, there should be a shift of dialogue outside of aesthetics.

A deep-seated desire for accountability is what will help Indonesia's fashion industry to flourish. Big magazine publications probably won't ever create flurry within the industry, but someone has to do it.