How Much of an Impact Do Consumer Boycotts Make?

Recently in the U.S. we have seen many consumer boycotts take place in response to corporations' actions. These are usually done as a political stance. A recent example is the Uber boycott that occurred in January, when Trump announced his infamous travel ban. Taxi drivers interrupted their work to show solidarity with the protesters at the JFK airport while Uber turned off their surge pricing in what seemed like an attempt to get economic gain. Opponents of the travel ban were furious with Uber for taking advantage of the situation and subtly supporting Trump's decision. Soon after, the boycott caused "Uber's C.E.O to drop out of President Trump's council." The boycott seemed to have influenced Uber to make a decision that would make consumers happy, but the company didn't go through a great economic loss.

In "Social Media Boycotts Succeed When They Reflect a Movement," Americus Reed argues that the reasoning behind consumer boycotts need to come from a cause that people will remember. He mentions how 24-hour news distracts consumers from awareness of corporations' wrong-doings. Reed emphasizes that a successful boycott needs to make a lasting impression on consumers. "If the boycott reflects a movement -- rather than a moment -- it can change the world around it." Do you guys think that these attempts to damage corporations' economic growth, perspectives, and practices work? What are some ways they can be more successful? Should people forget about boycotts all together and just stick to voting in order to make a political stance?

Emily Quezada

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2017/02/07/when-do-consumer-boycotts-work