Pride is a human rights thing. It's not equivalent in any way or shape to nationalism. There is a certain hypocrisy in supporting LGBT causes to one audience, and being radio silent about it to another audience (during what is a world-wide, borderless event). Effectively signaling on one hand "we support LGBT" while on the other signaling "pride? what's that? lulz". Por que no los dos.
If the state owns these corporations they don't have to pick and chose. The voter can decide whether the hypocrisy is worth the extra return on investment from pandering to other regions
Tell me your solution to preventing companies maximizing profit margins which this is a case of. Or is is this another case of b****ing without having a single tangible solution?
The companies didn't champion LGBTQ issues here until it wasn't really an issue here. I don't believe having the colors during pride month is championing an issue here. They are merely showing support to those that are. I would be happy to have the companies start championing LGBTQ human rights in the Middle East. But since they never championed them here before it was already established, I don't find it odd that they aren't.
I find it inherently hypocritical to "show support to those that are" in one region while refusing to provide that same support in another region since pride doesn't really have anything to do with nationalism and goes beyond borders. You are correct that it follows with their previous behavior, but IMO once you cross that barrier in one region you should not pretend like it's not applicable in another. That's either hypocrisy or insincerity, perhaps both. Don't show one set of values in America and refuse to abide by those values elsewhere. All that being said, I think it's all bullshit corporate dollar chasing and didn't really believe they sincerely support LGBT from the start so lol.
These massively publicly traded companies are pretty much running on autopilot where every single decision is based on satisfying the fiduciary responsibility of the executive to the shareholders. That literally is the only motive driving these companies. SO no single person is being hypocritical here. It's it's literally a bunch of decision makers making sure they follow their legal fiduciary obligations. I', honestly trying to figure out what is the actual complaint here and who it's directed to and what is a tangible solution here?
Yeah, it's insincerity for sure. But corporations have hardly ever been in the forefront of championing issues. Expecting corporations to all of a sudden be at the vanguard of a movement is something that was never really done before. So it seems like it is hypocritical to call out corporations now and never before. I agree with you that they aren't being consistent in their support. But that has never been an expectation unless that is the brand of the company. So why now? What seems at least as insincere is people who are supposedly worried about LGBTQ, but in reality are simply looking for a way to attack folks on the left who do actually care about equal rights.
Corporations are all about the money Hell . . .how many corporations can trace their roots back to slave trading/native american genocide Did you expect that to stop? Rocket River
Great post. I'm actually shocked that this isn't just as obvious to some of the other posters on this thread.
This feels inapplicable to the current circumstance. They're not hypocrites for "not being in the vanguard". They're hypocrites for having inconsistent (if not contradictory) values based on their audience. Hypocritical of... who? Because consistency in your values/beliefs is antithetical to being a hypocrite. Why now? Why the hell not. See something? Say something. You're acting like nobody ever pointed out corporate hypocrisy before, which is a ludicrous assertion. Maybe, doesn't make the point any less valid.
Some combination of lowered expectations and shooting the messenger I suppose. It's a fairly easy thing for everyone to agree on. Corporate American doesn't give a flying **** about oppressed people.
They only care about money If China doesn’t want Black characters on the Star Wars posters , they will comply why? There’s way more Chinese people in China than Black people in China
Trust me, I would love for corporations to spearhead change in values towards enlightenment. I am 100% behind the idea that they should call out and not coincide with human rights violations and descrimination. But you are denying the position many individuals and definitely corporations take. The position is that they support inclusion but aren't willing to challenge governments and entire cultures to buck the system and make personal sacrifice to see that change come about. MLK was against that attitude in the general populace as well as corporations. I'm sure the corporations are all on record calling out discrimination against LGBTQ. But they haven't ever been at the forefront of change and I don't think anyone expects them to be part of the vanguard. That has never been a role of a corporation. It is idiotic to act surprised, offended, or shocked that profit driven corporations aren't sacrificing their profits to be drivers of change. It is hypocritical and offensive that people use the human rights violations and descrimination of nations in the middle east, not to fight against those violations but as a prop to attack people who actually do work to further human rights on the same issues.
You mean bringing bans on reproduction rights and criminalize homosexuality and transgenders and give everyone a semiautomatic rifle? Maybe it will?
The intentions might be noble: spread awareness, building a positive brand image. It is not necessary brave to do it now versus sticking out their neck 40 years ago. When a company supports a social cause, it's usually just the decision makers and PR department. The strategy is tapping into customer's political/social affiliation, so they develop stronger brand loyalty. The messaging is as much of the gay population as it is for straight population, who in general, are acceptive of gay rights. It can be lumped with things like donating to charities. With the barrage in June, the strategy is kinda backfiring. Imagine if there was some obscure law that says companies can donate money to worthy causes (ex: food banks), but only anonymously, would these companies still do it? (or as much). Plastering a rainbow logo on Social Media, is cheap and easy for everyone to see. And yes it is virtue signaling. Do you want to know how the maker of your toaster feel about immigration rights? Spoiler: ummm... :D Not gonna lie, audience was popping on pride night. Makes people forget how bad the team is.
I think people need to understand that companies do not operate as a single unit - where the company is a single person that is acting. There are 10's of thousands of people in these companies with competing agendas - in other words the employees control a lot of how a company presents itself. It's not just marketing (but that's a big part), it's also the employees.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around how masks are child abuse..... What exactly is your point or outrage? Corporations are using free speech that you don't like for their brand image? Going to burn or ban some books about it?
