A new poll reveals that 20% of Americans plan to permanently boycott companies aligning with Donald Trump’s agenda, a response driven by the rollback of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. This boycott movement, stronger among younger generations and minority groups, reflects consumers leveraging their spending power to protest perceived moral compromises by corporations. The top reasons cited for boycotting include expressing dissatisfaction with current government policies and demonstrating consumer influence. Companies, facing potential economic consequences, claim their actions are due to a changing legal landscape surrounding DEI.
Read More
Ben & Jerry’s alleges that its parent company, Unilever, ousted CEO David Stever to silence the ice cream company’s political activism. This action follows a series of disputes, including Unilever’s alleged attempts to prevent Ben & Jerry’s from criticizing President Trump and supporting Palestinian refugees. The move violates the merger agreement that established an independent board to safeguard Ben & Jerry’s social mission, the company claims in a lawsuit. Ben & Jerry’s has a long history of outspoken advocacy on social issues, dating back to its founding. Unilever’s actions are seen as an attempt to curtail this activism.
Read More
A 40-day boycott of Target, initiated by Rev. Jamal Bryant, began Wednesday in response to the company’s scaled-back diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. This follows Target’s January announcement eliminating minority hiring goals and restructuring its DEI programs, a move criticized by customers and even the daughters of a co-founder as a betrayal. The boycott coincides with economic challenges for Target, including decreased customer visits and the impact of tariffs. While Target maintains its commitment to inclusivity, the boycott’s impact on both Target and the Black-owned businesses it supports remains to be seen.
Read More
Investors in farm equipment giant Deere overwhelmingly rejected an anti-diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) resolution, delivering a resounding defeat to those pushing this agenda. The proposal, submitted by a group known for similar campaigns targeting other major corporations, garnered a paltry 1% of the vote. This outcome starkly contradicts claims of widespread investor dissatisfaction with DEI initiatives.
The near-unanimous rejection suggests that investors prioritize company stability and success above all else. They see DEI not as a distraction, but as a factor contributing to a company’s overall strength and competitiveness. The perspective of many investors is that a diverse workforce brings a broader range of perspectives and ideas, fostering innovation and better decision-making.… Continue reading
Florida’s Attorney General, James Uthmeier, sued Target, alleging the company misled investors by failing to disclose the financial risks associated with its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. The lawsuit, filed in federal court, claims Target’s Pride month merchandise and broader DEI programs provoked a negative consumer backlash, harming sales and ultimately costing shareholders. Uthmeier argues this violates the Securities Exchange Act. The lawsuit follows similar actions against other corporations, highlighting a growing conservative backlash against corporate DEI policies.
Read More
Shareholders, represented by the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR), are pushing UnitedHealth Group to report on the economic consequences of delayed or denied healthcare. This non-binding proposal argues that UnitedHealth Group’s practices create macroeconomic risks impacting investor portfolios due to the company’s immense size and influence on the US healthcare system. UnitedHealth Group is contesting the proposal on grounds of vagueness, despite the proposal’s focus on transparency regarding the “externalities” of its operations. The proposal’s novelty highlights a growing concern over the broader economic impact of healthcare access limitations.
Read More
Target’s cofounder’s daughters, Anne and Lucy Dayton, publicly criticized the company’s recent rollback of its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, arguing that this decision contradicts the company’s founding principles of customer focus and community well-being. They expressed concern over businesses succumbing to political pressure, asserting that ethical business models are not inherently illegal. This action follows Target’s decision to end programs supporting Black employees and businesses, a move mirroring similar cutbacks by other major corporations. Target declined to respond to the criticism.
Read More
Google executives addressed employee concerns regarding the termination of diversity initiatives and the retraction of its pledge against developing AI for weaponry and surveillance. The changes, explained as compliance with evolving legal directives and a desire for greater involvement in geopolitical discussions, have eliminated diversity training programs and AI development restrictions. This shift follows the removal of diversity hiring goals and aligns with recent actions by other tech companies. Executives emphasized a continued commitment to hiring the best candidates, while acknowledging the influence of recent executive orders on DEI programs.
Read More
Google has removed references to Black History Month, Women’s History Month, LGBTQ+ holidays, and other cultural events from its calendars, citing the unsustainable nature of manually maintaining hundreds of global events. This decision follows Google’s rollback of DEI initiatives and name changes reflecting executive orders from President Trump. Users now must manually add these events to their calendars. While Google claims continued celebration of cultural moments through other avenues, the calendar change has drawn considerable user criticism.
Read More
Google’s recent decision to eliminate diversity-based hiring targets has sparked a considerable amount of debate. It’s a move that’s being interpreted in many different ways, highlighting the complexities of diversity initiatives within large corporations. Some see it as a necessary step towards a purely meritocratic hiring process, where the most qualified candidate, regardless of background, is selected.
The argument for meritocracy centers around the belief that hiring decisions should be based solely on skills and experience. Focusing on factors like race or gender, some argue, introduces bias and undermines the goal of finding the best person for the job. This approach emphasizes a fair and equitable playing field, where every applicant is evaluated solely on their individual merits.… Continue reading
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood