this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2025
442 points (96.6% liked)
196
5578 readers
1042 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
Also, when sharing art (comics etc.) please credit the creators.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Okay, but giving Sony money is not the most effective way to express that sentiment.
I mean, what's the reverse of a boycott?
ttocyob
Girlcott
yikes, talk about gifs that didn't age well
That shit still slaps though
Boycotts don't work either, for that matter.
It's weird that we so often see political/social problems and think "I know, I'll help solve this by giving (or withholding) my money from some for-profit corporation and hope the influence will trickle down to the cause I actually care about!"
Instead, you know we could just support activists working to advance that cause (or outlaw that bad corporate behavior) directly, right?
I just think it's myopic and counterproductive that so many people seem to think "vote with your dollar" is the only strategy to consider, especially when they're working-class and have negligible numbers of dollars to vote with.
Edit: I have been boycotting Sony for 20 fucking years now, ever since they put rootkits in music CDs. I'm not saying "don't boycott things;" I'm just realistic about how effective they are. Getting Kimmel back on the air is the exception, not the rule.
So let me get this straight: not giving Sony extra money is "sucking on that boot?" Because what, you think Sony is some kind of champion of anti-fascism now?!
What the fuck is wrong with you people?!
Dude, the internet just bullied Disney into rehiring Jimmy Kimmel. Do you know how? Boycotting Disney's subscription services, unsubscribbing, and stating that it's because they fired Kimmel.
A for profit corp will absolutely change course if their wallet takes a big enough dent.
And yet it did fuck-all to solve the underlying problem of Trump shitting on the First Amendment and getting away with it.
The solution to that can only be political.
You: "I want a rocket ship to go to work!"
Everyone: "How about we start you off with a car, and we'll work our way up to a rocket ship?"
You: "Fuck that bullshit, Imma walk instead!"
The underlying problem is that like half of Americans only pay lip service to the First Amendment.
If there is enough will, boycott works. It work to help end the apartheid in South Africa.
The Montgomery Bus Boycott was also famously effective.
The two are not mutually exclusive. For-profit corporations react to, well, changes in profit. It's not about the influence 'trickling down', it's about punishing bad behavior on the part of corporations in the only way that they actually understand - something which other corporations, desperate to please their shareholders, take note of.
Boycotts, performed by a sufficient percentage of the consumer base, do what they are intended to do - adjust corporate behavior. Nothing deeper - but far from pointless. And considering how fucking difficult it is to pass regulations, and how even with a friendly legislature such things take considerable amounts of time and must avoid violating corporate 'rights', boycotts are not a tool to be discarded out-of-hand.
As long as for-profit corporations exist - and they appear to be well-established to continue to do so for the near-future - we must deal with them as they are, not as we wish them to be (ie well-regulated or gone).
It's not the only strategy, but pretending that corporations don't affect society, or that consumers don't affect corporate behavior, is foolishness. Corporations, as a class of entities, vacuum up most wealth in our society, but individual corporations still rely on relatively narrow consumer bases with small individual consumer purchasing power - a chip company that suddenly loses 20% of its sales for a year is in deep shit - with the shareholders if nothing else, and that's what corporations care about. For that matter, one of the few advantages of our ultra-fucked capitalist society in the states is that there are plenty of meaningless choices - there are half a dozen different brands of fucking cereal. It's not about having 'more' or 'less' dollars to vote with - allocating those dollars differently still can send a message - assuming the boycott is widespread and narrowly targeted.
On top of that, this is about a video game, an extraneous expense to begin with.
Too many people have gotten so accustomed to "deal[ing] with them as they are" that they've lost sight of the real problem entirely.
Look man, "Abolish for-profit corporations, and all that implies" has significant support on here, but not so much in meatspace America. Most of us are trying to play the cards we have with the players we have.
They haven't 'lost sight' of the real problem, they disagree that there is a problem to begin with. And we, as leftists, have to work against that being the dominant view. But that's groundwork, and boycotts are action for more immediate purposes. Two entirely different undertakings.
Still weird that you're white-knighting for Sony, though.
Which companies PR department wrote this?
Not Sony's, that's for sure, since the point of my comment is advocating against giving them money.
I have absolutely no idea how you could misunderstand me so badly to think that this was somehow pro-corporate. If anything, it only supports my argument about how fucked up it is that people see things only from a capitalist perspective!
No, either you're arguing in bad faith or your rhetoric is seriously lacking. You open with "Boycotts don't work", then go on a rant about how people give/withhold money from corporations and then babble something about activists as if you couldn't do both, boycott a company AND support activism. It's clear you're not in favour of corporations but your argument is essentially to not even bother doing the bare minimum because it's not as good as a fundamentally different economical system.
I opened with "okay, but giving Sony money is not the most effective way to express that sentiment."
Don't accuse me of bad faith when you're the one lying.
Also, I've been boycotting Sony for literally decades (and have no intention of stopping). I'm speaking from bitter experience when I tell you it's not the best strategy, but I also never said not to do it!