Without emotion this stuff can be fascinating

[Eagledad]

I find these boycotts like the ones against Chik fil A, Disney, and Dixie Chicks fascinating. Not on a political basis, but on a humanity basis. I admit I enjoy observing human behavior and these boycotts are very interesting.

 

Im not a fan of Chik Fil A, I only eat there as a last resort like after an Oklahoma State Night Football game where Chik Fil a is about the only restaurant in Stillwater open to get a quick meal before the hour drive back home. Say what you want, Chik Fil A knows how to put out a lot of food in a short time.

 

However my kids are crazy about them. Two of my adult kids camped overnight at Chik Fil A one year for an opening day promotion of a one years free sandwiches for the first 100 or so customers. I was surprised by the big response to Chik Fil A because most of their customers are younger folks. I thought it was the younger generation that was accepting of gays, so I assumed the boycott would be a success because of that.

 

But what I heard was that its not so much that the younger adults support gays, they just arent against them. Its more of a to each their own attitude. What bothered these young folks was being told what they should and shouldnt eat based on political correctness. Especially about a subject that isnt important to their lives.

 

OK, that is so simplistic, Im still trying to understand it. However one thing seems for sure, if the activist cant get the younger geeneration to jump on board, then I don't see how it can go anywhere. We will have to wait and see.

 

So now Im thinking about the Dixie Chicks boycott. Again I was not a fan because I dont really like Country or Western music, even though Ive own horses and live in states where its acceptable for girls to wear Cowboy Boots and shorts at the same time. I found the Disxie Chick boycott an interesting observation of human behavior because the bands base completely abandon them. Yet, folks who didnt really care for their music made a couple of their records number one. Wow, not that is some activism on both sides. Talk about emotion, but that is another discussion.

 

The Dixie Chick boycott is also interesting because once everything settled down, the band disappeared. The boycott worked because they lost the base. That really surprised me because the bands popularity came from both the Pop music crowed and the County /Western crowd. I would have thought the Pop folks would have kept them alive. Adding to that, I learned that in a lot of cases, bands dont survive on record sales because record companies take such a big cut. Concerts are bands big money and marketing producers. Dixie Chicks record sales success wasnt enough to counter the cancelled concerts. Maybe the question there is how long can activism support last where their is no real desire for the product? I dont know why, but that shocked me. The Dixie Chicks went from the top to the bottom in a matter of months because of a boycott.

 

Then there is the Disney boycott. Has it affected Disney? Doesnt appear so, but anyone who visits Disney parks notices a large number of attendees are foreigners. It would be interesting to poll all the attendees to learn how many even know of the boycott. At the same time, wouldnt it also be interesting to learn how many of them who know of and agree with the prinicple behind the boycott still attended the park?

 

We will have to wait a while to see how the Chik Fil A boycott really pans out. But after learning about the attitude of some young folks I read about, I kind of wonder if it is going the way of the Disney boycott. Just not enough interested folks willing to give up their delicious sandwich. I just assumed that the boycott would hurt the restaurant because of its popularity of the younger demographic. But are we miss understanding the younger generation. Is the general attitude for homosexuality to be accepting only up to the point that its not inconvenient? Also, I wonder if that where the base of the gay movement wanted to go all along?

 

If that is the case, and Im not saying it is, but if hypothetically the younger generation only accepts homosexuality as long as it doesnt get in their way, how could that affect the BSA? I guess that is the question some assume they already know. But maybe the Chicken boycott is a better indicator than emotional assumptions.

 

I will have to watch and listen to my kids to learn more.

 

There is a lot of stuff here, does anyone else see this as interesting?

 

Barry

 

[fred8033]

I remember the Dixie Chick controversy back when it happened. I had to look up the details. Then read about their 2006 tour. Wow. Adding concerts in Canada. Canceling and downsizing concerts in the US. Now touring as an opening act. Not as a headliner. Hmmm....

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accidents_%26_Accusations_Tour

 

It's also interesting in that they've won multiple Grammies (plural of Grammy???). Shows a disconnect between sales and awards. Interesting.(This message has been edited by fred8033)

[Lisabob]

First: I like the Dixie Chicks and I think Chik-fil-A is yucky.

 

Second: I agree that boycotts in general aren't very effective, most of the time. To work, they require a very high level of discipline among would-be consumers. If the boycott is leaky, or if only those who never would have been consumers anyway participate, then the boycott will be ineffective.

 

One of the problems with the Chik-fil-A boycott is that the people who are most likely to be concerned with gay rights issues, probably also aren't huge consumers of CFA to start with. First, because CFA is a mostly-southern enterprise without the same kind of loyal consumer base in other parts of the country. Seems to me that gay rights tends not to be as popular an issue in, say, Alabama or Oklahoma or Texas, as in other parts of the country. Second, and this is purely anecdotal on my part and you all can now go about proving me wrong, but I think a lot of folks who are activists in gay rights causes are also folks who would be unlikely to eat fast food anyway.

 

So people who are offended by CFA's views weren't part of the base of CFA customers to start with - hence, them boycotting a company they never did business with in the first place isn't going to be highly effective.

 

Yeah, from a social movement and community organizing perspective, this stuff really IS fascinating, I agree.

 

 

[perdidochas]

In the case of the Dixie Chicks, they simply forgot who their core audience was. Country music fans are much more loyal than pop fans. Yes, the Dixie Chicks sold a lot more of their album after the controversy than they did in their previous albums, but they lost their country fans, who would have kept their career going as long as they wanted it.

 

My guess is that the Chic Fil A boycott repercussions will be localized. Some franchisees are going to make a killing, and will be doing as much business as they can. Others will go out of business.

[Eagledad]

Yes, I compared the Dixie Chicks controversy with the Chik Fil A because both controversies come under the heading of free speech. If we look at each drama under conservative/liberal headings, how can conservatives support Chik Fil As right of free speech while not supporting the Dixie Chick right to free speech? One theory is that their reaction wasnt really about free speech, it was instead an emotional reaction to a challenge of their strong feelings on the subject. But I was reminded that the anger toward the Dixie Chicks was not their anti government opinions, but that they stated their opinions in other countries. Folks just felt that was a cowardly way to protest. That muddies the data and the theories.

 

I dont know, but it does suggest the possibility that we as a culture base our principles from emotion and can change instantly in the moment. Still, on that theory, there must be a core somewhere down deep that holds us to some kind of principled compass.

 

Barry

 

[Eagle732]

I'm suppose to be boycotting DIsney!??

What did they do?

Whatever it is the boycott's not working, I was there last month and the place was crowded as heck.

[Eagledad]

>>Second, and this is purely anecdotal on my part and you all can now go about proving me wrong, but I think a lot of folks who are activists in gay rights causes are also folks who would be unlikely to eat fast food anyway.

[packsaddle]

If you want to grok humans all you need to do is watch monkeys.

That said, I have never liked the Chic-fil-a fast food. I couldn't care less about what's-his-name's stupid opinion, I detest the food anyway. The biscuits are indescribably bad and the chicken, likewise. I far prefer KFC (which has a central place in my concept of heaven), and yes, I do know that is mostly because of all the MSG...I don't care. If I tossed a Chic-fil-A sandwich onto the ground someplace I would expect some stray cat to dutifully cover it with dirt.

 

>>>WARNING>>>small hijack now, since this about chicken>>> there's a place in the forest not too far from here and the local lore is that it is the site of 'Devil Worship'. There is a fire ring of carefully cut and fitted stone and several stone benches surrounding it in a circular pattern. It's on a hilltop. Locals are (I'm not kidding) convinced there is Devil Worship going on because after most weekends you can find the remains of dead chickens scattered around this site. Animal sacrifices! Some of the locals even know the identity of the leader: he is an elderly gentleman with a goatee and spectacles. His name is Colonel somebody. This is serious. I've had individuals get angry with me for laughing at them when they talk about that Devil Worship. One guy wanted to start a fight..but I was laughing too hard to play the part. Interestingly, you can't convince these same people that Obama is actually an American

[Horizon]

One great boycott was Los Angeles boycotting Arizona businesses because of the AZ laws on immigration.

 

Except that they found out that they could not get out of some contracts, and others they could not replace (like, say, electricity that is bought from Arizona). The cops still use Tasers, for example.

 

Oops.

 

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/05/local/la-me-arizona-boycott-20110605

 

When I was growing up, Jane Fonda movies were not allowed to be shown in our house. My father despised her for her actions during the Vietnam era. I don't think that hurt her much.

[fred8033]

Horizon wrote: "When I was growing up, Jane Fonda movies were not allowed to be shown in our house. My father despised her for her actions during the Vietnam era. I don't think that hurt her much."

 

Jane Fonda's career took a HUGE HUGE HUGE hit because of that incredibly insensitive picture she took and all the surrounding comments etc. And rightfully so. Our soldiers were getting killed every day in Vietnam. And she (i.e. Hanoi Jane) was sitting on artillery aimed at our soldiers. There are multiple generations that remember that picture. http://www.iconocast.com/07-10-2012/74/Jane-Fonda-regrets-missile-picture.php

 

I thought of the Jane Fonda parallel with the Dixie Chicks too.

 

The one I get a kick out of is the generation of men that won't support the Red Cross because the Red Cross charged them for donuts and coffee in London during WWII.

 

Boycotts are interesting. But lifelong brand damage is a whole different level.

[perdidochas]

I support the idea of boycotting companies who's owners' views are counter to mine, and for you to boycott companies who's owner's views are counter to your views. However, I'm totally against the idea that governmental people can stop the opening of companies in their cities because the companies' views are counter to the views of the governmental person.

 

Private people can punish freedom of speech through the market. The government should not.

 

 

 

[packsaddle]

Fred, my FIL, a really nice guy who I can only hope to be as good as, was one of the soldiers who captured some of those really costly Pacific islands. Tarawa was his first action. He would not discuss the war. He would say that he would never, NEVER support the Red Cross. I hope it wasn't because of the rumors:

http://www.snopes.com/medical/emergent/redcross.asp

 

[JoeBob]

I think we're missing an important subtlety.

 

Chik-Fil-A does not have an anti-gay policy.

1- Anti gay marriage is not anti-gay.

2- Chik-Fil-A does not discriminate against gays. They have gay employees and gay customers.

3- The expressed personal beliefs of their elderly founder are not reflected in their business practices.

4- The philosophical beliefs of Truett Caffey have no direct input in the product sold - chicken sandwichs.

 

The Dixie Chicks' product is their words. It's much easier to attach an unpopular spoken belief to a product that consists of other spoken (sang) words. It's hard not to think about "We don't like George Bush in Texas" spoken on a French stage while you're trying to enjoy a country song coming out of the same mouth.

[packsaddle]

"Anti gay marriage is not anti-gay." JoeBob, you're missing something and it ain't subtle.

[Mr. Boyce]

Anti gay marriage is not anti-gay. Marriage is a social structure, not an individual deal; it is predicated on the development and continuation of families through time, which is a social concern, and should be of serious concern, given current demographics.

 

The gays need to lighten up.