It only gets called activism when it scares someone with power.
My impression is that calling something activism is a seal of approval by the journalist.
It's pretty clear from many of the comments in this HN post's replies that many people find this particular form of political activity a threat in ways that they don't find more status-quo enforcing forms to be.
Do you think that lobbying for and getting massive tax exemptions has no social impacts? SCV is basically one of the richest places on the planet, with likely trillions of dollars effectively flowing through it, and it can't even manage to keep enough shelter for homeless people going or have a functioning public transit system.
That's not neutral, but we pretend it is. It is social, but we pretend it's not.
You could also say that one kind of activism is considered more PR friendly. It's obvious that a company lobbying for lower taxes is directly beneficial only to that company, and that's why we don't hear about it. The problem I think a lot of people (myself included) have with the more obviously "social" corporate activism that the article describes is that it feels extremely fake, and corporations are only doing it to make themselves look good.
In 2017, Coca Cola put out a commercial[1] that depicted a heated kerfuffle between protesters and police. Then a celebrity walked onto the scene and handed some people a nice cold can of coke, and everyone started smiling and relaxing like the problems that brought them to that point were solved. Everyone rightly hated it, and it was pulled. How is anyone supposed to believe that that any of their activism isn't just a form of PR? When I see CEOs of gigantic corporations (including coke) go on TV to talk about how some new legislation is going to hurt the little guy, I can only roll my eyes and wonder how anyone in their right mind can believe them, or why they are being given a chance to speak on the matter in the first place.
I believe the most beneficial thing a company as big as coke could do to help anything would be to pay their fair share of taxes, and that any form of activism they engage in is a distraction from the fact that they will never willingly do that.
[1]: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/pepsi-ad-kendall-jenner-...
edit: s/coke/pepsi/g, which I will leave because just lol what a dumb mistake
So anyone saying 'trans people deserve basic human rights' is actually saying something else, like about access to women's spaces. That disingenuous advocacy of one thing to get another thing through under the table is more activist than principled. In a company or otherwise.
https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2021/4/5/22368566/corporate-re...
Larry Fink's letters to CEOs (Blackrock has $9 trillion AUM)
https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b1qqdhmzgrwbb3... ("When Fink calls for transparency on issues like climate change, companies with significant BlackRock ownership adjust their disclosures.")
"As society became politically polarized, companies became more activist. With a 24-hour news cycle and social media fanning polarization, it’s more problematic for organizations and their CEOs to remain neutral. Consider what’s happened in the past decade: Hobby Lobby — a chain of craft stores that challenged a federal mandate stating companies pay for insurance coverage for contraception — took their case all the way to the Supreme Court and won. Nike featured the controversial athlete and social crusader, Colin Kaepernick, in an ad campaign. Retailers like Walmart and Dick’s Sporting Goods stopped selling certain weapons in response to tragic mass shootings nationwide."
https://hbr.org/2020/02/how-do-consumers-feel-when-companies...
Ok.
https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/politics/colorado-vote...
https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/vote/acceptableFo...
https://sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/georgia_voter_identif...
By contrast Georgia has historic minority voter turnout and voted in 2 democratic senators and voted for the democratic presidential candidate. In response the republican state government passed a law restricting voting under the claims of voter fraud despite there being no evidence showing such fraud.
https://www.denverpost.com/2021/04/06/colorado-georgia-votin...
Colorado voters can use a wide range of identifying documents, from standard photo ID to a bank or utility statement. If you have no ID or any of the other documents, Coloradans able to cast a provisional ballot, and counties must attempt to verify those individuals’ identities.
https://www.npr.org/2021/04/07/984857562/fact-check-how-colo...
You mean likes: the media only ever amplifies what it likes and wants more of. There's like 1m people at the pro-life march each year that get zero press.
Tens of Thousands. This was well before quarantine and for the first and only time with a president in attendance.
https://heavy.com/news/2020/01/trump-march-for-life-2020-cro...
As for the pro-life marches, its telling the something like Fox News doesn't even cover them huh there bub? Your bias showing through?