124

Support declines for Corporate America's political involvement (www.axios.com)

submitted 1 year ago by stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to c/politics@lemmy.world

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Support is waning for corporate involvement and advocacy around many of the country's biggest hot-button social issues, according to a new Public Affairs Council survey shared first with Axios.

Why it matters: No business wants to become a political football ahead of the 2024 election.

all 15 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] zeppo@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

I owned a couple of small businesses and never saw the point of taking sides on political issues. Personally, of course, but not the business or myself when representing the business., which includes my personal facebook account which had 2,500 people from an industry I was in. Prospective or current customers weren't looking to the companies for political advice... they wanted us to do our jobs for them. From a practical level it seemed like taking a stand on divisive issues would lose us more customers than we'd gain.

[-] toasteecup@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

I think it's a different situation when the company is a big company.

Example, I like knowing my grocery store is trying to use sustainable food procurement practices.

I don't really care about my grocery store having an opinion on gun rights other than to say "don't fucking use it in the store"

[-] krashmo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

That's the thing though, it's almost never relevant. I don't care what Budweiser thinks about the LGBTQ community. It makes no difference if Target supports abortion rights or not. These things are entirely divorced from the business these companies are trying to carry out and yet they take up a sizable chunk of public discourse and advertising space.

Politics taking over every aspect of culture is insufferable and this seems like a great place to start when it comes to making politics less combative. Let's stop making a taco purchase a political statement.

[-] cmbabul@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So the heart of what you are getting to is that the techniques of marketing have become so effective, efficient, and advanced that it’s mechanisms have realized the best way to get people to buy things is to appeal to deeply held opinions and beliefs and that practice is bringing those beliefs and their contrasting opinions to the forefront of common discourse. Which is then in turn both unveiling the deep ideological divisions that already existed amongst us to light but is also inherently exacerbating those divisions by raising their profiles. All in the pursuit of further revenue. The issue isn’t politics invading everything, it’s everything invading politics

Marketing is just propaganda with a business goal rather than a political goal. We should’ve put stringent limits on what it’s allowed to do after we watched what Goebbels and Riefenstahl were able to do

[-] Maeve@kbin.social -2 points 1 year ago

We should’ve put strict limits on it with Bernays’ “torches of freedom” rubbish.

[-] Oshka@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

I would feel the exact same way, but there is one thing stopping me. These companies then use my money (and others) to fund super pac's to lobby congress and buy politicians to enact legislative I think is morally and socially bankrupt. When companies can no longer do this, I think that's the day business becomes less political.

[-] zeppo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I am indifferent to the politics of Bud Light (can't/wouldn't drink it anyway), and I understand they wanted to modernize the brand and broaden it's appeal, but it's almost comical how badly they misread their audience. Of course the people who reacted badly are a bunch of wankers, but... those are the people who drink Bud Light.

[-] toasteecup@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That's why I draw the line where I did, to show that relevance should matter.

[-] theotherone@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

I do want to know where a company stands on social issues. If they don’t want/don’t care about the people I care about t h en they don’t need my money either.

[-] zeppo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Sure, but it could harm a business my size. I wasn't interested in discriminating among customers based on their political views. But if I even responded to memes about politics on Facebook i could end up with colleagues or store owners not wanting to work with me. Stuff specifically relevant to the business, sure, of course take a position on that.

[-] Coasting0942@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

Not a businessperson but you’re not supposed to publicly support stuff, that’s what the secret money funds are for…. Donor privacy!

[-] agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 year ago

"Human Rights brought to you by Pepsi!"

Sounds real genuine doesn't it.

[-] Maeve@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Instead of virtue signaling, let them put out quarterly public reports about what they donate to what causes and politicians. I’m holding my breath, of course.

this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023

124 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19104 readers

2384 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News