In a bold critique of the current state of activism and consumer behavior, marketing expert Scott Galloway has initiated a movement he calls “Resist and Unsubscribe,” targeting the outsized influence of major tech corporations on the American economy. Galloway, a prominent marketing professor, has expressed disdain for the way Silicon Valley executives have ingratiated themselves with the political elite, particularly during the Trump administration. He argues that their involvement with the White House reflects a prioritization of profit over principle, calling them “enablers” rather than neutral business leaders.
Galloway’s campaign encourages individuals to cancel their subscriptions to tech giants like Amazon, Apple, Google, and Netflix, suggesting that such actions could influence these companies by impacting their market capitalizations. He illustrates the potential financial implications of a subscriber cancellation, asserting that even a single canceled subscription could lead to substantial losses in market value.
However, the efficacy of boycotts has faced considerable scrutiny. Research indicates that collective consumer actions often fail to yield the desired results. Historical examples, such as the American boycott of French wine during the Iraq War and the 2020 Goya Foods boycott, reveal that sales typically rebound post-boycott, undermining the intended message. Studies have shown a consistent pattern: after an initial surge of emotional outrage, consumers often return to their previous purchasing habits, making it challenging to maintain momentum in these movements.
Galloway’s initiative comes at a time when boycotts proliferate across the political spectrum—both leftist and right-wing activism targets a plethora of companies. From the People’s Union USA against corporate giants to the active counter-movements condemning brands like Nike and Disney, the list of companies facing calls for boycotts seems endless.
Amidst this climate of consumer activism, Galloway suggests an alternative approach: a “Boycott of Boycotts.” This new movement would promote individual consumer freedom—encouraging people to make personal purchasing decisions based on their values and preferences rather than through collective pressure or public condemnation. The essence of this movement is that consumers can opt not to participate in campaigns that may not align with their beliefs, embracing instead the simplest form of choice: shopping.
This fresh perspective on consumer behavior emphasizes autonomy and thoughtful decision-making, rather than joining the fray of endless boycotts. Instead of being swayed by mass movements, individuals can choose how to spend their money in a way that aligns with their values, potentially fostering a more sustainable relationship between consumers and corporations.
As the discussion around consumer activism evolves, it is hopeful that embracing personal choice in purchasing could ultimately lead to more meaningful change, as it allows for a greater alignment between consumer values and corporate behavior.