XPost: talk.politics.guns, talk.politics.misc, soc.culture.usa
XPost: soc.culture.israel

On 5/15/2024 7:07 AM, Michael Ejercito wrote:

https://ethicsalarms.com/2024/05/15/companies-deliberately-alienating-undesirable-comsumers-whats-going-on-here

Companies Deliberately Alienating “Undesirable” Comsumers: What’s Going On Here?”
MAY 15, 2024 / JACK MARSHALL

I don’t think we’ve ever seen this before the 21st Century emergence of The Great supid, with those entrusted with the management of for-profit companies deliberately choosing virtue -signaling over profitability.
What does it all mean?

Today’s example is Sports Illustrated, which, I must confess, I thought
was defunct. The once indispensable sports photography and commentary magazine almost went under last year and was apparently bought by a last-minute rescuer.  So how does the magazine launch its comeback? Why,
by prominently including the above model in its annual swimsuit issue
due out this month, displaying other comely and not so comely models in
gowns rather than bikinis (Who, other than Oprah, wants to see Gail King
in the S.I. swimsuit issue?) and highlighting Angry Lesbian Megan
Rapinoe to promote the issue. That should really draw the guys!

Why do this? Don’t get me wrong, now, I’ve always found the swimsuit issue an embarrassment, just a cheap way to get publicity and sell
magazines by turning a sports publication into a girlie mag once a year.
But what is the point of deliberately annoying the market for the girlie magazine issue, which is straight males? Over at Hot Air media, David
Strom quotes “the editor who made [S.I. go woke]” as saying that “she was happy to jettison her audience,” when she said, allegedly, “We didn’t care. We thought that the right reader would come along with us
and the wrong ones we didn’t want.”

I can’t find other any reference to that quote or who the speaker was,
but the upcoming swimsuit issue sounds like it will certainly consistent
with that objective. I guess you could call the strategy a success: circulation of S.I. is about 50% of what it was just a few years ago.
And the readers are all woke and wonderful! But what company executive
does that—decides that the product has attracted the “wrong” customers and their corporation only wants to get business from the “right” ones?

Well, quite a few companies, at least lately. That is certainly what
Disney has done and continues to do, although I still find it difficult
to believe that stockholders won’t step in, if belatedly, and force the company back on track, whatever that track is now. The Bud Light fiasco
was perhaps the most similar example, even to the extent of a brand
leader who stated in no uncertain terms that the beer’s market, though robust, needed to”evolve and elevate.” Victoria’s Secret also abandoned its core market in 2021, bringing in—there’s that name again—decidedly non-sexy Megan Rapinoe as the company’s new face. Shockingly, that
strategy didn’t work, and as of 2024 Victory’s Secret is again going
back into the sex fantasy market.

There’s a name for this phenomenon other than “batshit crazy.” It’s called “The Burge Effect” after conservative blogger David Burge, aka. Iowahawk. He outlined the process in an immortal tweet nine years ago,
“1. Identify a respected institution 2. Kill it. 3. Gut it. 4.Wear its carcass as a skin suit, demanding respect.”

Sounds a lot like Harvard too, come to think of it.

Consumers still have the power of the dollar. Target waved the white
fag flag this year. Walmart is firing a few hundred of their woke
management. Disney has been firing woke people and claiming that the
savings is profit.

The solution is simple. Don't fund corporate idealism you disagree
with. Fire them. Starve them to death by keeping your money in your
pocket or spending it elsewhere. There's more to life than feeding woke pigeons. They just eat and shit on you anyway. Let them crap on
someone else.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)