Another Amazon Boycott Looms Amidst DEI Concerns and Corporate Greed Accusations
Amazon and its affiliated businesses are bracing for another consumer boycott, slated to run from May 6th to May 12th. This boycott, orchestrated by The Peoples Union, a grassroots organization, stems from a confluence of factors, including accusations of corporate greed, concerns over the rollback of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives by certain companies, and disapproval of former President Donald Trump’s efforts to dismantle federal DEI programs.
The Peoples Union, the same group that organized a one-day economic consumer blackout on February 28th, aims to exert economic pressure on Amazon and its extensive network of subsidiaries. The boycott encompasses a wide range of businesses under the Amazon umbrella, including Whole Foods Market, Amazon Fresh, Amazon Prime Video, Audible, Twitch, Ring, Zappos, and Kindle.
Since the initial consumer blackout in February, The Peoples Union has maintained a consistent schedule of weekly boycotts targeting various businesses and retailers. Among those targeted were Walmart and General Mills. The group also held a second three-day economic blackout in April, demonstrating its commitment to sustained economic activism.
The Peoples Union’s boycott plans extend through July 4th, a date significant to the organization. John Schwarz, the organizer of The Peoples Union, has indicated that longer-term boycotts targeting specific companies will be announced on that day, signaling a potential escalation of the group’s economic activism.
These boycotts initiated by The Peoples Union are occurring concurrently with other separate actions organized by different groups protesting against retailers like Target. The landscape of consumer activism has become increasingly complex, with various organizations and movements pursuing distinct yet overlapping goals.
John Schwarz, the founder and driving force behind The Peoples Union, has emerged as a key figure in the recent wave of consumer boycotts. Schwarz has stated that he was surprised by the widespread traction his initial video, proposing a national one-day consumer blackout on February 28th, gained. Since then, Schwarz, actively engaging with his followers on Instagram under the handle @theonecalledJai, has outlined several other boycotts, further solidifying his role as a prominent voice in the consumer activism movement.
In a post on May 2nd, Schwarz directed criticism towards Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos in response to the White House’s announcement that Amazon would not display the increased costs of items resulting from Trump’s tariffs. Schwarz accused Bezos of backing down, framing it as a struggle against a billionaire who allegedly avoids paying his fair share of taxes, manipulates markets, silences sellers, and flaunts his wealth while many Americans struggle financially.
Further amplifying the message of the boycott, Schwarz stated in an Instagram post on May 4th that the Amazon boycott was disrupting the status quo and sending a clear message to Jeff Bezos and Amazon that consumers have had enough. These statements underscore the intensity of the group’s resolve to hold Amazon accountable for its perceived shortcomings.
Amazon has refrained from commenting on the consumer boycotts, maintaining a position of silence amidst the mounting pressure. The company’s lack of response may reflect a strategic decision to avoid drawing further attention to the boycotts or engaging in a potentially unproductive public debate.
The article highlights the mixed results of consumer boycotts, acknowledging that they have proven effective for the political right. Conservative activists have successfully organized boycotts that pressured retailers and companies to scale back their DEI efforts by targeting sales. This demonstrates the potential for boycotts to influence corporate behavior when supported by a unified and determined consumer base.
Brayden King, a professor of management and organizations at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, pointed out that multiple boycott efforts with overlapping or conflicting messages can confuse consumers, making it difficult for them to decide which action to take. This observation emphasizes the importance of clear and concise messaging in boycott campaigns to effectively mobilize consumer support.
Target, another major retailer, has faced numerous boycott efforts, beginning with a boycott organized by Minnesota activists on February 1st. Additionally, some members of the Black faith community initiated a 40-day Target Fast during Lent and Easter, which has evolved into an indefinite boycott against the retailer. These ongoing boycotts have reportedly contributed to a decline in Target’s stock value and a decrease in both in-person foot traffic and online traffic.
However, the article also notes that some firms have reported data indicating that web traffic and sales for retailers like Amazon have remained stable or even increased during some of the targeted boycotts. This highlights the potential limitations of boycotts, suggesting that they may not always have a significant impact on a company’s overall performance.
The Peoples Union’s future boycott plans also include focusing on the Latino community. The Latino community has been actively using the hashtag #LatinoFreeze on social media, urging supporters to withhold their spending in response to freezes on DEI initiatives, reduced funding for the National Institutes of Health, and actions related to immigration. The website latinofreeze.com provides a list of companies that have either supported or criticized DEI efforts, serving as a resource for consumers who wish to align their spending with their values.
The article concludes by providing contact information for Betty Lin-Fisher, the consumer reporter for USA TODAY, encouraging readers to reach out with questions or feedback. The inclusion of this information reinforces the article’s commitment to informing and engaging with consumers on issues related to boycotts and corporate accountability.
