Carhartt. Levi’s. Disney. Coca-Cola. Gillette. The list goes on. Companies who have decided it is more important for them to make a social statement rather than focus on their brand. I suppose, to an extent, business has always been filled with people who make statements with how they run their business. But it used to be more about what they did, than what they said. Some companies were just all business — Leave the other stuff on the other side of the door; we’re here to make money. Others made social care part of the company — Thanksgiving turkey donations, holidays off, United Way drives.

But today, we have companies not just trying to help society, but to change society. And, I suppose that is their decision. However, whenever you make a decision to plant your flag on a hill, you have to know it is the hill upon which you are ready to die. A company has to realize that it may very well be driving off as much as 50% of its potential customer base. Sometimes it is more than that. It all depends upon how much of society you are alienating with your decisions.

It’s a slippery slope – the mingling of business and attempts to be a moral compass.

When Starbucks came upon the scene, their liberal corporate activism was part of who they were. They didn’t hide it; they pushed it. Ben and Jerry’s has done much the same, as has Nike. Apple, Microsoft, Twitter, and Facebook have all had some form of activism at their core from the start.

Conservative companies face the challenge as well. Hobby Lobby, Chick-fil-A, Black Rifle Coffee all face ridicule for their conservative stance. Of course, these companies were founded by individuals who built their conservative leaning in to their business model from the beginning. Their customer base often chooses them because of their conservative business models, not despite of them.

But is there a difference in companies which are founded around their principles and those who take an established business where their consumers choose not to go?

Businesses who have their political and moral principles built into the core of their business face less challenge than established companies who are taken over and directed toward activism. Those established companies spent years building brands trusted by all. They’ve appealed to broad groups. And adding activism to their business models can’t help but impact their brands. The swing can go either way — drawing or repelling consumers, depending upon who they desire to attract.

The New York Times (another liberal institution) had an interesting article:

Red Brands and Blue Brands: Is Hyper-Partisanship Coming for Corporate America?

Major brands and chief executives have become increasingly entangled in social and political debates. Is more to come?

There is little doubt the Hyper-Partisanship is here. The conservative mantra: Go Woke. Go Broke. has finally joined the left’s Cancel Culture.

And the corporate question comes: Is it worth the Brand?

While consumers ask a similar question: Is the Brand worth it?

One thing is for sure, the votes will come in as dollars or they won’t come in at all.