Monday, February 12, 2018

Progressive Big Brother has corporate sponsors


It's not often that the left-wing, liberal, progressive campaign to dominate what we think and how we interact is unmasked quite so blatantly.  I suppose we should thank Keith Weed of Unilever for doing so.

Unilever is threatening to pull back its advertising from popular tech platforms, including YouTube and Facebook Inc., if they don’t do more to combat the spread of fake news, hate speech and divisive content.

“Unilever will not invest in platforms or environments that do not protect our children or which create division in society, and promote anger or hate,” Unilever Chief Marketing Officer Keith Weed is expected to say Monday during the Interactive Advertising Bureau’s annual leadership meeting in Palm Desert, Calif.

“We will prioritize investing only in responsible platforms that are committed to creating a positive impact in society,” he will say, according to prepared remarks.

Unilever, one of the world’s largest advertisers, is leveraging its spending power to push the digital media industry to weed out content that funds terrorism, exploits children, spreads false news or supports racist and sexist views. The consumer-products giant spent more than $9 billion marketing its brands such as Lipton, Dove and Knorr last year, according to the company’s annual report.

. . .

This is about “having a positive impact on society and whether we as a company want to engage with companies that are not committed to making a positive impact,” Mr. Weed said in an interview.

. . .

Mr. Weed said that consumers ... care about “fake news” and “Russians influencing the U.S. election,” he added.

Rather than issue a public list of demands, Mr. Weed said he wants to work privately with the tech companies to come up with solutions. Unilever said it has already held discussions with companies such as Facebook, Google, Twitter Inc., Snap Inc. and Amazon.com Inc. to share ideas about what each can do to improve.

. . .

Mr. Weed said that advertisers need to be outspoken about issues on tech platforms, since they are almost entirely supported by billions of ad dollars.

“One can start by not putting ads on content we do not want to encourage,” he said.

There's more at the link.

It's Orwellian, isn't it?  Just look at the buzzwords - code words to cognoscenti who know exactly what he's talking about.  "Fake news", "hate speech", "divisive conduct", "protect our children", "responsible platforms", "positive impact", "racist or sexist views", "Russians influencing the US election" . . . the list goes on and on and on.  The only problem is, those views are entirely subjective.  What's "hate speech" to one side of the aisle is nothing more than freedom of speech and religion to the other (e.g. a Christian pastor giving a sermon on homosexuality from the perspective of traditional Biblical morality). What's racist to one person is nothing more than common sense to another (e.g. "Black lives matter" versus "all lives matter").  Again, the list could go on and on.

We don't just have to worry about the corridors of power in Washington.  SJW's, progressives and their ilk have infested the corridors of corporate America too, and they're using its financial muscle to impose their views and their will on the rest of us, whether we like it or not.  Unlike politicians, whom we can vote out of office if we choose, we have no recourse against the corporate crusaders except to boycott their products if we disagree with their views - but some consumers may find that impossible, for various reasons.  The bald fact remains that if Unilever, or any other large advertiser, decides that my views and outlook on life fall on the wrong side of their judgment scale, and use their advertising muscle to affect companies and platforms that I patronize, I lose.

What's the solution?  Personally, I vote with my wallet.  Others may disagree.  Please let us know your view in Comments.

Peter

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

I, too, vote with my wallet, but it can mean a bit more work to get things you want.
I no longer go to Outback, for instance. That isn't too onerous; I liked the Bloomin' Onion, but I can either live without them or learn to make them at home.
I don't do business with Mall-Wart. Lots of folks would be stumped right there--an amazing number of people actually would not know where else to get cleaning supplies & such things. I don't deal with K-Mart or Target, which came later, but limited my options further. There are a few other companies, but you get the idea. It just means I have to look further afiels.
Oh, and online shopping only helps so much. I won't do business with Amazon; that's a big segment of the online selection right there.
It comes down to what you consider important enough to stand for, & that's an individual decision.
--Tennessee Budd

Ray said...

I’m a bit shocked by the comments and I see them as unbelievably short sighted...

Rob said...

President Eisenhower warned us in 1960 about the "military industrial complex". That group has changed and grown in the last 58 years. All the main stream media today is corporate owned and by darn few corporations at that.
The media, the corporations, the multinational businesses have changed what's "normal".

The US Supreme Court has given corporations civil rights, they have allowed law enforcement to become highwaymen via "civil forfeiture". The government reads all your electronic mail & access to your elected leaders, real access, is limited to those who have the money.
"Normal" is very different today than it was 60 years ago.

Vote with your pocketbook as long as you can.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like we really need to start busting up these huge monopolies and multinational conglomerates. Dust off and update the anti-trust laws and start dismantling the corporate beasts.

Anonymous said...


This is off topic Peter but I thought you might like to hear about lions helping to solve the poaching problem.
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2018/02/poacher-lion-attack-maul-south-africa-spd/

urbane legend said...

Anonymous, you are so right about the monopolies and conglomerates these days. start dismantling them.

Then where will you get a television? A cell phone? A car battery, because a company called Johnson Controls makes most of the batteries sold in the United States?

The mom and pop business model is dead. Get used to it.

deborah harvey said...

the fifth column was active in the 30's and has spread like the cancer it is since then.
i just pray, because only God can bring victory and cleansing out of this morass of evil.
it is not humanly possible to know the locations, people, and systems involved.
the police state is close but God can remove it.
the industry officers who want to control us like puppets can be removed in one fell swoop by almighty God.
it is up to us to watch and pray.

Anonymous said...

Why are Conservatives never “carryin’ on” about liberal blabbering? We just avoid / stay away because we
are intelligent and don’t throw violent tantrums. Damage and expense would not occur if the other side followed
our example.

I also refuse to buy many of my favorite products because they don’t respect my opinions. It may not hurt them,
but it’s all I can do other than speak out, like this. Like acorns become oaks; trillion$ begin as pennies.

RobC said...

No dear Weed... you do not decide for me at all...

McChuck said...

Unilever - one big stick to beat you with. With a big enough Unilever, they can move the world.

Unilever is headquartered in London, with their US operations in New York. These people have probably never met someone who didn't share their Oxford/Harvard viewpoints.

Anonymous said...

I want free speech - I should be able to say what I want as a private citizen without worry that I will lose my career. It is also agreed by all sides that I don't get to use the resources of my place of work to spread my private views.

Respect for private property and free speech, in my opinion, demands that we extend that same right to Mr. Keith Weed (just like Rockefeller, Ford, Gates, or the Koch brothers). They can do whatever they want with their personal income to promote their personal views.

But when a CEO uses the resources of a corporation to spread their personal views, especially at the potential cost of the shareholders ("get woke, go broke"), that is wrong. I will vote with my wallet.

PS: Radicals will not like the precedent they are setting by trying to make all things political. They tried to bankrupt Chick-fil-a and were surprised at the result.

Sam L. said...

I don't do Facebook, Twitter, or any other social media.

Anonymous said...

You can "vote with your wallet" all day long, but your picayune purchases have zero effect upon leviathan sized companies.

Once they achieve a certain size, they have an inertia that is resilient to small market fluctuations, and BTW, look around, your influence is small.

When the most powerful office in the world (POTUS) is in a knife fight mutiny in his own administration, with the aid and comfort of subordinate departments, your detergent and deodorant purchases amount to nothing.

Communism, socialism (communism in the slow lane), and muslims are encroaching on all sides. "Conservatives" have willingly abdicated their responsibility and sent their children directly into government schools for collectivist indoctrination for generations. ( out of 10 colleges/universities are de facto FOB's in every community.

"Yeah, but I don't buy brand X toothpaste".

Please.

Aesop said...

Unilever should contact the NFL and ask them how that whole crapping-on-your-customer's-heads policy is working out for them...

Mike Doyle said...

Ah, yes. "Fake news" being defined as, "Any report that throws doubt on my ideology-driven programme" (in a hat-tip to Mr. Blair, UK spelling deliberate). "Hate speech" being defined as, "Any statement that disagrees with my ideologically-driven worldview." "Divisive content" being defined as, "Any facts that contradict my ideologically-driven narrative."

Mr. Weed needs a dose of Agent Orange, so to speak. I shall try to avoid UniLever products, but, as Anonymous at 3:26 PM points out, it may do little good by itself. Perhaps some pressure on stockholders in combination with a boycott...?

Dan said...

Our wallet is the only 'vote' the average person has that is actually listened to.
But it only works if we tell the subject of that 'vote' why we are taking our dollars
to another vendor. And we must make that statement clear and unequivocal. So when a
company offend you take your money elsewhere.but more importantly TELL them why.