this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2025
79 points (96.5% liked)

politics

22612 readers
6491 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

When it came time to plan San Francisco Pride this year, Suzanne Ford, the organization’s executive director, reached out to some longtime corporate sponsors to ask how they planned to support the event.

Their abrupt responses stunned her: Not at all.

Several of the event’s largest sponsors — including Comcast, Anheuser-Busch and the beverage company Diageo — told Ms. Ford that they would not be providing funding this year. The companies, which together provided over $200,000 to San Francisco Pride in 2024, each told her that supporting the event was no longer in its budget, she said.

. . .

With only weeks left to lock in sponsors for the summertime events, Pride organizers across the United States say that many longtime corporate sponsors are suddenly being evasive about their financial commitments or abandoning their support entirely. While some companies cited tight budgets or economic uncertainty, Pride organizers see another factor: President Trump’s widening crusade against diversity, equity and inclusion, which has prompted corporate America to retreat from such initiatives.

MBFC
Archive

top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ctkatz@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 days ago

i'd like to think most of us saw all of the pride/dei public promotion as virtue signaling (and being honest i was **not **one of those people). but now i hope all of those corporations get all the backlash. not because they were pulling back on all of that but because they were using the very public symbolism as a marketing opportunity and nothing else. it gives the impression that they never had implemented any of those practices or believed in people being who they are in the first place and that's worse. i would not shop at those places just for these places using very public movements as an "US TOO!" crass commercial opportunity. end stage capitalism in practice, and now watch as these same corporations cry poverty and some sort of activist interference because the free market is reacting to their actions.

[–] the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This is an unexpected plus in my book. I am hoping now that no one is doing it for performative rainbow capitalism you will see who the true allies are because only the allies will be associating with pride.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

And my needless expenditures have plummeted because I can't shop anywhere.

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago

Corporations never cared about pride, dei, BLM. It's always been simple ROI and advertising and right now the ROI is terrible when a neo-Nazi government backed by a coward opposition party that would over on command.

Activist should always be of the opinion of use them but never count on them.

[–] odelik@lemmy.today 17 points 1 week ago

Good!

I was getting tired of going to corporate marketing parades disguised as Pride Parades.

I wish this was the reason they were backing out though.

[–] huppakee@lemm.ee 17 points 1 week ago

They should publish a list, immediately makes clear what companies supported the gays because of their beliefs and which did because of their greed and financial opportunism.

[–] venotic@kbin.melroy.org 9 points 1 week ago

They never cared to begin with.

Corporations have treated Pride Month and events as just opportunities to sell their pride version merchandise. They've been doing that for years.