I can hear Jeff's argument (in this very thread), that as a video creator, taking a public stance is an already impactful way to put pressure on the manufacturer. That's leverage enough for him.

Yes, his replies in a neighbor comment is exactly to that effect and of course one has to agree. But it is also notable that if i dare summarise from his parallel comment, he would have loved to return the dishwasher too but that this has already cost him so much time that “I don't know if I have the time for it.”

So here's the thing. It would be unfairly cynical to suggest that Jeff is only doing this to further his own content as a content creator. I think most would agree that Jeff is also frustrated by this and wants to push back. And as someone with influence any impact he can make is undoubtedly a good thing. It's even easier to say nothing at all.

But it is also hard to separate out to what degree the motivation to put in the effort to write an article, produce and edit a video stems from the desire for content and what stems for the desire for real change. It is somewhat telling that he had the time and motivation to produce the video (which is also a ton of work), but not to return the dishwasher?

Real advocacy has to go beyond influencers promoting causes that already align with their target audience. We have to go beyond just saying things on social media in the belief that that is somehow sufficient to "do our bit". Otherwise we can kid ourselves that we're doing good, when are we really, really? Real advocacy requires real change, and that's the hard bit.

I'll add that the fact that this article is already "22 hours ago" and is now largely now in the past somewhat proves the point. Attention has already moved on, actual opportunity to lead by example avoided and the cycle continues. And companies know this, which is why such practices are on the rise (the real evidence).

Last comment, promise.

I think there may even be an argument that a stance like this can do more damage than good. It may actually normalize the view that it's sufficient to promote on social media but ultimately take no action. There's a danger of furthering a sense of complacency where we want to do the right thing, but where sufficiency in "the right thing" has been normalized down to a grumble and a tweet rather than to actually take real action at any real personal cost.

Alternatively put, if everyone else doesn't do the hard bit, why should I?

Consider real leadership that makes the hard choices and leads by example. You see a friend step up against something at cost to them, and it's that what motivates you to join them. Leading by example is what motivates people.

I think it would have been so much more effective if Jeff returned the dishwasher. People see that personal cost and it _means something_. Otherwise why bother? I mean, that's what Jeff does, right?