Tabitha Brown has recently encountered significant backlash for her comments regarding the boycott of Target, prompting her to bolster her security in light of the controversy. The uproar was sparked by accusations that Target was reducing its commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, a decision that many, particularly in the Black community, found concerning.
Taking a different stance from boycott proponents, Brown articulated her apprehensions that such a consumer boycott could adversely affect Black and Brown entrepreneurs who rely on Target to sell their products. Her connection to the retailer is underscored by her licensing agreement for her haircare line, which is available in stores nationwide.
In an attempt to clarify her viewpoint, Brown recently joined iHeart’s “Not My Best Moment” podcast, hosted by fellow influencer KevOnStage. She remarked, “I own multiple businesses. Don’t worry about me. But these other people… some of these Black-owned businesses, it’s their first time being in the store.” She underscored her disappointment that this controversy coincided with the launch of products celebrating Black History Month, which amplifies the potential risks for these businesses.
Brown emphasized the importance of educating the public about the boycott’s implications. She appealed to consumers to consider that a significant drop in sales might prompt Target to reconsider its relationships with small businesses, thus limiting their exposure and opportunities.
Addressing misinformation surrounding the situation, she clarified that claims suggesting all Black-owned businesses had been ousted from Target were unfounded. “They didn’t do that yet,” Brown noted, explaining that any potential removal of products would depend on performance analytics by the end of the fiscal year.
Prominent figures associated with the boycott, including Pastor Jamal Bryant, have criticized Brown, suggesting her influence due to her agreement with Target. However, she maintained that withdrawing her products is a complicated issue fraught with legal and financial implications.
Despite the negative responses to her remarks, Brown reaffirms her commitment to supporting small businesses and upholding her values in her professional dealings. She mentioned plans to include a dual-morality clause in her future contracts, ensuring she can distance herself from brands that conflict with her personal ethics.
This situation illustrates the difficult position public figures like Brown occupy when navigating discussions about social justice and economic equity. While her intentions stemmed from a desire to advocate for small businesses, the reactions she has received highlight the delicate nature of such dialogues, especially within the framework of race and community solidarity.