corporate success for companies like McDonald’s or Coca-Cola rely on the broadest appeal. that means being politically agnostic. aligning with anyone would alienate at least some of their customer base and cost them tremendous amounts of money. so they just stay as neutral as possible.
How come some Corporation or some Business don't sponsor a protest? Like McDonald's sponsoring that No Kings protest. Or a hotel giving free room and board to protestors and so on?
Submitted 1 day ago by Patnou@lemmy.world to [deleted]
Comments
homes@piefed.world 1 day ago
BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
Politically agnostic out in public, politically fascist in the sheets.
birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
See also: the owner of Chipshol (related to Schiphol, the airport(, who donated millions to the fascist party, despite donation restrictions being active.
mech@feddit.org 1 day ago
This would be the most American thing possible.
The success of the protests would be measured by how much profit they created.
Businesses would buy fire insurance, then give Molotov cocktails to rioters in front of branch locations trying to unionize.
Megaphone speeches would include messages from the sponsors.st3ph3n@midwest.social 1 day ago
Big business tends to be on the other end of the political spectrum
Codpiece@feddit.uk 1 day ago
Surely that would have to be changed to “No Burger Kings”. Wouldn’t have the same impact.
CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 1 day ago
“No Kings but the Burger King™” could get traction.
neidu3@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
I’m unsure if it would be cringe or clever if McDonalds went all in on the no kings protest, claiming that they thought it was against Burger King.
zxqwas@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Would you buy burgers from burger king if they sponsored people yelling outside abortion clinics?
Sponsoing protests would be a great way to lose half your customers. You won’t make up for it by selling more burgers to the protesters sympathisers.
bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
Just like Michael Jordan said: “Republicans buy sneakers, too.”
mechoman444@lemmy.world 22 hours ago
Large brands, like MacDonalds, avoid controversy because their business model depends on appealing to the widest possible audience. Their goal is to keep people consuming whether that means buying products, eating, or staying at their establishments.
Supporting movements like “No Kings” or any form of protest risks alienating a significant portion of potential customers.
There is no upside to taking a stance. Only risk to the bottom line.
scarabic@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
The business of business is business.
Businesses want stability, safety, and predictability. Protests really are kind of the opposite energy. Their whole point is to shake things up and reroute the direction of the world, sometimes in big ways. They can also be unpredictable and unfortunately in some cases even unsafe. I remember seeing every store window on Telegraph Avenue broken the day after a big protest. It was sad. The family owned grocery store got it just as bad as the corporate clothing retailer.
Not long ago when the Hong Kong protests were off the hook and things were getting super tense there, some Hong Kong family visited us here in the US for the holidays. The younger generation were super informed and watching their phones and they told us all about the protests, the political actors, the demands, the rhetoric.
Meanwhile, at dinner, the (very wealthy) grandma made a toast and said “Hong Kong needs peace! Doesn’t matter who’s in charge!” There was a super uncomfortable silence and you could see the youngs biting their lips. She has massive business interests there and just wants to keep manufacturing stuff. She doesn’t care about idealism or whatever else.
If a political candidate is really pro business, they don’t go about their agenda by staging protests. The two really just don’t mix. Businesses lobby and donate.
the_abecedarian@piefed.social 1 day ago
because then they would be punished by the trump administration. he would have govt agencies cone up with reasons to investigate them, take away their tax breaks, etc.
the point of a company is to make money, that’s it.
MantisToboggon@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Hippies smell you don’t want all your hotel rooms funky.
Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 1 day ago
calm down, cartman
MantisToboggon@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Fuck you hippy!
gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
You think any corporate board is gonna voluntarily paint a target on their back like that?
Or: look at the currently unfolding ramifications of Anthropic telling the pentagon to piss up a rope when they tried to order Anthropic to remove all the guardrails from Claude.
Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 1 day ago
“piss up a rope” is an expression i haven’t heard yet, it’s mine now :-)
HubertManne@piefed.social 1 day ago
I question the sincerity but its grassroots and no one is looking for corpo sponsorship. They could anonymously donate if they want and its important to them.
Aetherial@nord.pub 19 hours ago
That’s funny. They call it a protest but it looks like a mass therapy rally from here. Also, AFAIK Denmark and Thailand are both kingdoms and do just fine.
reksas@sopuli.xyz 1 day ago
protesting is one of the few “real” things left to us, it would be horrifying it that got commercialised too.
Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 20 hours ago
McDonald’s sponsoring that No Kings protest.
Don’t youknow they even give free crowns to little kids?
Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 1 day ago
🤦
Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
RRREEEEEEEEEE!! …brought to you by Carl’s Jr.
AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Civil unrest is the one situation where corporations hope everyone forgets they exist.