Wherefore woke corporations?
The right has a saying: “Get woke, go broke.” It’s not always true, but it does seem as though it is sometimes the case that taking a woke leftist stance hurts the bottom line. Just ask Budeweiser or Disney. And yet it’s seemingly done all the time.
It certainly didn’t used to be that way – that is, companies were far more rigorous in enforcing a “no-politics or alignment with causes” stance (see this). What changed? On the surface, it would seem to make no sense, but there are a host of reasons for it that probably would take a book to explain (and there may be a book someone has already written, and that someone isn’t me).
Here are a few of those reasons that come to mind: (a) the generation that is often in charge these days was educated, steeped, and marinated in leftist social activism as an absolute good and perhaps a required good (b) these woke campaigns are included in the general heading of historically less controversial anti-discrimination – in this case, in ascending order of presentation in time, anti-racism, anti-homophobia, and anti-transphobia (c) human resources departments have become completely dedicated to these things, as well; and (d) the companies are afraid of threats and boycotts by the left if they don’t toe the leftist line.
They are learning that the right can put economic pressure on them too.
Will it matter? I don’t know. I think there will be a little pullback by these companies from the more egregious examples, but not a lot.
Not sure that the back lash against Transhueser Bush and Disney are driven by the Right as much as being just a reaction by salt-of-the-earth Americans who don’t drink the woke KoolAid.
I’ve said it before. People on the left reflexively and instinctively tend to boycott companies and products that don’t fit in with their ideology. Even school kids. Say what you want; we on the right are pikers when it comes to expressing our economic choices in this manner. Companies know this.
It’s mainly “(4) the companies are afraid of threats and boycotts by the left if they don’t toe the leftist line,” if you ask me (which you didn’t).
Call it threats and boycotts, call it corporate shakedowns and muggings (I sure do): money talks, nobody walks.
Call it mob rule (which it is).
When is enough, enough with this d#mn insanity / inanity? Or is it already too late?
While I’m no longer surprised by the commercialization of Pride Month (why a whole month, BTW?), I continue to wonder why some companies have joined the parade. Why, for example, does a pet supply company now have a section on its website labeled “Show Your Pride” with rainbow-themed merch for pets categorized by species? I was puzzled by the rainbow-striped “Pride Vibes” item for reptiles– turns out it’s a cape to be slipped over the critter’s neck. Fish get rainbow-colored swim-through ceramic ornaments for their bowls or tanks. As for the rainbow-striped collar for teh kittehs, there is no way I’d put a thing like that on a cat named for Casey Stengel. The best part? The section right below the “Show Your Pride” merch is titled “Grooming Supplies.”
https://www.petsmart.com/
Sigh. Another company goes on my no-buy list.
Apart from pandering to human virtue-signalers, merchandising Alphabet People stuff for pets is bad because it encourages a recent trend on social media to interpret some ordinary household pet behaviors as proof that cats or dogs can be gay, bisexual, or even pansexual. Thankfully, common sense still prevails among vets at least. After looking at cat behaviors (cuddling, grooming, sharing pet beds, etc.) that some people regard as sexual interactions, one vet explains that they are not. Bottom line: “It’s theoretically possible that cats can be gay, bisexual, or identify in another way, [but] we have no scientific evidence to support this.”
https://cats.com/can-cats-be-gay
I assume much the same holds true for dogs. Humans should stop attaching their sexual obsessions to other animals– including forcing pets to observe Pride Month.
Hopefully boycotts will bring some of these corporations to their senses. If not, I for one will not object to a lot of destruction of shareholder value.
Wow!
While I read a recent reference to North Face having an LGBTQ ad out, I hadn’t seen it but now, having seen it, I’m surprised about how unapologetically “flamboyant” and in your face it is. Moreover, North Face reportedly also has a tie in to a line of LGBTQ themed kids outdoor clothing and equipment.
I don’t think that North Face can get more “in” than this.
See https://www.theblaze.com/news/the-north-face-drag-queen
It’s really simple and really direct. We here at this blog are simply way out of touch and ignorant about how the world works now.
It’s ESG-linked financing. When you are a business, and your ESG score goes down, so does your ability to get financing.
From 2020:
The number of companies using this funding mechanism has grown to 265 worldwide now from just eight in 2017. So far this year, 98 issuers have tapped the sustainability-linked loans market, compared with 128 in 2019 and 45 in 2018.
Under this lending model, borrowers pay higher interest rates when they fail to meet certain environmental, social and governance-linked goals. By the same token, they pay less when they exceed ESG targets.
For example, the Australian engineering firm Downer EDI will add up to 4 basis points, or trim as much as 6 basis points, from its margin based on whether it meets goals on greenhouse gas emissions, indigenous cultural awareness and mental health and first-aid training, according to people familiar with the matter.
From 2021:
The focus on the borrower’s achievement of SPTs is one of the key features of sustainability-linked instruments. According to the LMA Sustainability-Linked Loan Principles, the sustainability performance targets should be “ambitious” and “meaningful” to the borrower’s business. Targets can be linked to traditional environmental targets, as well as to non-environmental targets (ESG targets). The borrower can set its own targets, tailor-made and appropriate to its own business operations. Examples are:
E: carbon footprint, energy consumption, water consumption
S: labour conditions, human rights, food waste
G: male/female employees, staff shareholdings, gender pay gap, diversity in the workplace
It is also possible to measure sustainability-performance to a certain sustainability rating given by an external reviewer.
I think (a) and (3). (Neo small quibble, either use numbers or alpha, but don’t mix).
I take as an example: Disney. Then CEO Chapek wanted nothing to do with engaging in politics, especially in Florida. However, what I have read is that he was under huge pressure from employees (HR, Iger, the Board?) to make a statement. So, he caved and the rest is history. One of his many blunders and I also wonder if the virtue signalling crowd within the company smelled a bit of blood in the water. I’ve also read many testimonials from cast members in Florida, some gay, who were very upset with Chapek’s move. However, Iger seems to now relish continuing the fight; interesting choice as the parks are the one aspect of the corporation making money.
Here’s Deloitte on ESG-linked financing. It’s being bankrolled by institutions that lend large amounts of money, doing the bidding of the Deep State.
It’s really important that we educate ourselves on how this works, and it’s why “going woke” doesn’t end in “going broke”.
The big banks and big investors are tying the funding they offer to “wokeness”, and they are doing that because First World governments and the UN want them to–this is kind of thing they get up to in Davos.
There’s no shortage of approaches that governments and others are taking to meet environmental, social, and economic challenges. The Biden administration has taken steps with a combination of executive orders, proposed rules, and commentary on climate risks, diversity and inclusion, community reinvestment, ethical uses of artificial intelligence, and a heightened focus on regulatory enforcement. Similarly, both the European Commission and the United Nations have released goals and objectives related to ESG, and they’ve been joined by other public and private organizations.
These new frameworks have helped define a complex array of issues. For an industry built upon counting and reporting, these frameworks feel very comfortable. And despite varying levels of depth and industry focus, it’s clear what these frameworks share:
Protecting the environment
Promoting equity
Fostering trust and stability
The essential opportunity for financial services firms is in catalyzing and accelerating the transition to a new economy, one based on ecosystems that satisfy fundamental human needs and wants while also tackling urgent societal challenges that demand new solutions.
Traditional economic structures are giving way to a consumer-led economy where capabilities are organized around core human needs and wants. Unlike the traditional industry value chain, where the customer sits at the end of a line of B2B relationships, these new arrangements place customers in the center. The overlapping value webs surrounding them will deliver on human needs more directly and powerfully than ever before.
Societal challenges consistently change and create new threats. These issues also offer tremendous opportunities for the financial services industry to play an impactful (and profitable) role.
The road ahead will not be a smooth one, and the financial services industry will need to prepare for inevitable shocks that arise over the next 10 years. Some of the most credible and impactful challenges include climate adaptation, additive manufacturing, the changing role of work, and reducing inequality. These shocks aren’t mutually exclusive, however; many of them may emerge over the coming decade, and the materialization of one may spur the development of others. This makes it even more urgent for industry leaders to prepare for all of them.
Taken together, these opportunities and shocks present a daunting list. From an ESG perspective, none of them should be considered in isolation from each other. Instead of thinking of managing ESG in vertical silos (E, S, or G), leaders should shift to a multidimensional view to examine the risks and opportunities present in all three areas and across the broader jobs to be done.
Recognizing that the jobs to be done around protecting the environment, increasing equity, and ensuring stability are complex, what are the tools that financial services firms can bring to bear? Addressing the opportunities around transforming education, or managing the shock of another biothreat, requires a well-equipped tool belt.
In a recent publication on the future of financial services, we argued that the industry plays five fundamental roles. They are:
Facilitating value exchange and liquidity
Providing a means for the secure storage of wealth
Offering mechanisms for risk management
Facilitating investment across multiple parties
Maintaining trust and confidence to drive economic growth
These roles continue to evolve. So how should financial service industry leaders think about the actions they should take? The answer to that question is that leaders should think horizontally about ESG, not vertically. This cross-pillar view of opportunities is also useful in assessing potential risks.
Frederick,
Thanks for that expose. I knew about ESG, but didn’t realize how pernicious it is. If it has its claws so international, how can we ever fight it? Just one more example of how the left is now 30 steps ahead of us. Time for my vodka on the deck.
Success depends on a number of issues. One is substitution. Bud Lite can be dissed and there are many other light beers which people more in tune with such things than I say can hardly be distinguished one from another.
So Bud cannot count on former customers to return gasping from a self-iimposed six-week beer drought.
I don’t do much shopping but I am not aware of Target bags in our recycle bin. So I guess my wife doesn’t, either. But if she/we did, could we find similar products and values at similar distances? Maybe, maybe not. Depends, again. In this case, does Target do something nobody else does in merch? That you absolutely must have?
Although, even a boycott which might be presumed to be temporary can lead to discovering that an exact match someplace else is not absolutely necessary for life to go on.
@Richard Aubrey:Success depends on a number of issues. One is substitution….
Money substitutes for money. If Target loses some sales they can make it up by getting a better deal on their financing from the big lenders that insist they stick by the LGBTQ+ crowd.
@physicsguy:If it has its claws so international, how can we ever fight it?
From the bottom up, and fighting it is not limited to voting in Presidential elections. A lot of the “fighting” will be focusing on the local, and lot will be “Irish Democracy”, “the silent, dogged resistance, withdrawal and truculence of millions of ordinary people.” And some inconvenient changes to your consumption habits.
Frederick:
Maybe they can get better deals from their woke financiers, maybe not. I seek not incentives and rationalizations for passivity. You be you.
the esg score allows them to hold one a while longer, while non zombie enterprises struggle, budweiser seems to be doubling down, on some of these signaling events dayton hudson seems to be backing away
Two important factors, I think, are:
–great fear of losing ‘young people’, however, defined, both as customers and as potential investors
–the influence of executives’ own kids…which they probably tend to over-generalize…and their spouses…ie, wives, in most cases
In addition to ESG, the Human Rights Campaign runs a “Corporate Equality Index,” which grades corporations on whether they support LGBT-etc. “equality.” Some of these corporate “Pride” efforts are surely to get a good grade and avoid being called “homophobic” or “transphobic.” If only they would realize that the large majority of customers would prefer they ditch the ratings, ESG or CEI, and just stick to whatever their businesses are.
A recently retired in-house counsel with whom I correspond said that in his company, the legal department was not pushing wokery. It was all coming from HR and corporate communications. The ‘C-suite’ types in his telling weren’t listening to counsel and appeared to allowed these departments to do what they pleased because ‘social media stuff’ was outside their wheelhouse. One thing we may be seeing is that the process of selection in major corporations is such that you get many other-directed and clueless fad chasers at the top. I’m thinking of the dozy fellow who runs Kroger, who, when questioned by Jim Jordan, chuffered about this committee and that process but had nothing to say about the substantive policy they produced. There’s that, and then there’s Iger at Disney, who appears to subscribe to this stuff. Others are under pressure from the Iger types running Blackrock.
It’s ESG-linked financing. When you are a business, and your ESG score goes down, so does your ability to get financing.
==
You mean they allocate capital suboptimally to enforce political goals. We had a recent experience with this from 2003 to 2009. It’s not sustainable.
@Art Deco:You mean they allocate capital suboptimally to enforce political goals.
Not necessarily their own capital, as the governments tax us and reward rent-seeking. You can allocate pretty suboptimally with the IRS and Congress helping by crippling your competition and throwing tax money at you.
It’s not sustainable.
Markets can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent…
@Art Deco: Nothing is sustainable in the long run, but whatever it is China is running, suboptimal as the capital allocation has no doubt been, has been working well enough for decades.
What the investors and banks are doing in partnership with government is moving us pretty quickly to a very similar system. It’s going to still be possible to do well and get rich, if you have the right friends, take care of them, don’t shoot your mouth off and don’t annoy powerful people. We’ll probably still call it “capitalism” even as China still calls their system “Communism”.
They value a high ESG score over short-term profits. So, it really won’t matter. Woke will be here for quite some time.
Dodgers caved on sisters of perpetual indulgence (the women’s luggage stealer senior Gov official was a member), due to wanting public funding for an Ariel gondola from union station to dodger stadium.
Basically they want to build a shopping area in the parking area.
https://www.stopthegondola.org/
It took a bit of digging to figure this out. Lots of government officials and ngo’s pressured the dodgers. The opposition is the Catholic Church and their fans.
Dodgers were big in the LA Hispanic community.
Not The Bee suggests taking a shopping break for the month of June, and not feeding the beast any more than necessary. See the end of the post for a long list of Pride parade sponsors who are going to do without my money — for whatever that may be worth.
It’s hard for consumers to fight investors: we don’t have the concentrated clout that they do.
However, it’s hard to invest in a bankrupt company, and every little drop in the bottom-line counts.
Death by a thousand cuts, so to speak.
https://notthebee.com/article/bud-light-doubles-down-on-lgbtq-and-sponsors-pride-parades-around-the-country-despite-a-30-loss-in-sales-over-the-dylan-mulvaney-controversy
Sometimes I wish I had patronized some of these political poseurs, just so I could quit.
But I hate to see some of my favorites on the list!
All this caterwauling, persecution, and victim-mongering over forced “celebration.”
Meanwhile, back on planet earth, the WSJ tells us about about an HIV-epidemic level increase in early mortality not among the middle-aged, but the young! And only in America.
“Deaths Of Despair Now Significant Among The Young” reads the Zerohedge title of this severe and startling new development. https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/deaths-despair-now-significant-among-young
Totalitarianism always about some bread and certain circuses, papering over while denying the real tragedies, and stupid, avoidable ones.
This article goes at it in depth. How long can our Masters keep on ignoring reality? A long, long time, I’m afraid.
Given that the Activist Left is actually a small, but extremely vocal, and highly media-supported, minority, I wonder how much of “corporate fear” is driven not by true concern over potential economic boycotting but worry about the public perception created by negative media “that might cause people to think badly about us.”
I suspect overrated fear of media representation rather than good understanding of one’s customers and rational business operations may be driving more of this than is realized.
Whether this is the case, or the result of sunspots, coastal thunderstorms in Borneo, or the heartbreak of psoriasis, the end result is the same – metastasizing Wokeness.
Pingback:Instapundit » Blog Archive » THEY THINK THE OLD TWITTER IS THE COUNTRY: Wherefore woke corporations?
None of this would have happened but for the ascendancy of women into positions of power in government, the corporate world, academia, and even the clergy. Get rid of them and the wokery will end
I agree with Neo on her points and add these:
1) these corps see cooperation with government as a way to hurt their competition.
2) As long as they can use our money it will continue. Think of books written and rich donors buy them warehouse them then awards are given.
One additional consideration… the LG portion of the community tend to be urban, concentrated and have substantial disposable income as many of those households are actually dual income, no kids (often referred to as DINKs). As such, historically, marketing to the gay and lesbian communities tended to be rewarding, especially as those campaigns tended to only be visible in urban areas.
MarkM
Excellent point.
Pingback:Instapundit » Blog Archive » NEO: Wherefore woke corporations? The right has a saying: “Get woke, go broke.” It’s not alwa
Razorfist noted awhile ago that it’s not so much, “Get woke. Go broke.” But rather, ‘realize you’re going broke, get woke.’ The normies in the middle don’t follow a lot of the corporate-political-activist stances until things get very in-your-face. But once it reaches them, and they take offense to it, they do leave and find someone else to fill that need.
I will probably post this in the open thread later today, but spend a very interesting 18 min with Glenn Beck on the Target issue:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbKLxJAuhik&t=1030s
Corporate accounting is complicated. That should go without saying. However, a drop in retail sales of a couple of percent isn’t meaningless.
Once a line of merch is up and running, the sunk costs are sunk, the infrastructure is built–sales force, transportation arrangements, all taken care of, material in is covered as is processing/manufacturing/packaging.
For that last couple of percent, the gross profit is pretty much all net profit.
You can tell how important this is when you’re in a district or a regional office with a couple of percent drop. Far more alarming than a couple of percent increase is rewarding.
So, while it’s fun to watch the BudLitening of AB, hitting like a bomb, you don’t need that to make a point.
Letter to sales/CEO/// “Dear Sir or Madam, I”m not buying your stuff any longer because I don’t like your support of genital mutilation of children without their parents’ consent, and even with the parents’ consent.”
A number of those plus a couple of percent drop isn’t meaningless, and at the least you have the moral satisfaction of not participating in the atrocity.
But if O’Keefe can get a few operatives into the inner councils and some up with some juicy stuff like Heinerwhosits–“fratty and out of touch”–things could get even more interesting.
”I will probably post this in the open thread later today, but spend a very interesting 18 min with Glenn Beck on the Target issue”
You want me to watch two 4-1/2 minute commercials in order to watch an 18-minute video?
No! Not a chance. Why would you even suggest such a thing?
There is a book. Vivek Ramaswamy’s “Woke, Inc.” Lots of insights.
None of this would have happened but for the ascendancy of women into positions of power in government, the corporate world, academia, and even the clergy. Get rid of them and the wokery will end
==
Women are more susceptible to certain sorts of nonsense than are men, and I suspect it is true that the more higher education is influenced by women, the less is free speech respected. That having been said, Bob Iger at Disney and the creatures running Blackrock are male.
What the investors and banks are doing in partnership with government is moving us pretty quickly to a very similar system. It’s going to still be possible to do well and get rich, if you have the right friends, take care of them, don’t shoot your mouth off and don’t annoy powerful people. We’ll probably still call it “capitalism” even as China still calls their system “Communism”.
==
Your welcome to make your deals.
Frederich has it 100% correct. And it will not have even the smallest chance of change until pass through voting (shareholder) is allowed. Currently, mutual funds and ETF’s vote the shares they hold for their customers. So a small group of people, the Blackrocks of the world, vote all the shares of the companies they hold for their clients.
Even with pass through voting, these finance firms hold tremendous financial power as they decide who to lend to, whose shares to buy, etc. Corporatism at its finest.
Neo, wonderful blog.
they really want to drain all the joy out of life
https://twitter.com/Saralimback
Pingback:If All You See... - Pirate's Cove » Pirate's Cove
physicsguy:
Thanks, fixed.
That’s what I get for being in a hurry.
Apparently even Fox News Corp. has bent the knee, and is proud of having a perfect Corporate Equity Index score.
IIRC, on that turned out to be his last show, Tucker did a segment on ESG and BlackRock that wasn’t favorable to either. I suspect that played a part in his firing. Especially as BlackRock owns about 15% of FNC and has started advertising there.
Vox Day’s Corporate CanceR (2019) and his earlier SJW books were prescient.
Pingback:Selective: Bud Light, Target Bleeding Money As Conservatives Boycott. The Dollar Amount Is Staggering. – Investment Watch - Daily News Circuit - Daily News Circuit
Now, there are reports that Kohl’s has also jumped on the LGBTQ+ bandwagon.
See https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/05/kohls-is-selling-transgender-themed-clothing-3-month/
“…Fostering trust and stability…”
(And UNITY, no doubt…)
But why do I suspect that this “trust” they are talking about is of the…
“Do whatever we damn tell you—or rather ‘gently suggest to you’—to do…because IF you don’t you can TRUST us to royally mess you up—YOU AND your family AND your business AND your future….”
Got that??
Good.
…Right. So, yeah, trust us….