Category: Corporate Wokism

Unaffected, Yet Still Amused

Corporate Wokism, Marketing / Advertising

As someone who has never drunk more than a mouthful of “light” beer (true story:  I tasted a Lite when I first arrived here, didn’t finish the drink, and never touched another of the type ever again), the brouhaha surrounding Bud Light’s marketing decision to elevate some girlyboy to be the brand spokesman has left me totally unmoved — well, apart from bursting out in derisive laughter, that is.

I don’t have a sexy MBA from some elite academic institution, so I’m hardly one to judge this latest example of woke stupidity [redundancy alert].  Nevertheless, here are some core principles I’ve discovered along the way, in a career that spanned over three decades of marketing and advertising.

Marketing Rule #1:  You never neglect (never mind alienate) your existing customer base.  They are the ones who pay your salaries and keep your production lines moving.

Marketing Rule #2:  Once your brand is established, you never chase after “new” customers, but concentrate on getting your existing customers to use your product more.  This is both intuitive and cost-effective, except perhaps to an inexperienced person with a sexy MBA from some elite academic institution.

Marketing Rule #3:  You never make radical changes to your marketing or advertising strategy, especially when it comes into direct conflict with the philosophy of the first two rules.

Marketing Rule #4:  You never let the latest “thing” drive changes to your marketing strategy, especially if that latest “thing” conflicts directly with your brand’s core principle (Unique Selling Proposition, ethos, whatever) and customer base.

And for senior management:  if anyone in your marketing structure — executives, ad agency, promotion company, whatever — suggests anything that flies in the face of the above four principles, fire them immediately before they get to make those changes.

Understand that they’re not being fired for making a mistake.  They’re being fired for deliberately ignoring the canon of the marketplace.

One Or The Other

Corporate Wokism, Literature

If it’s not Gummint fucking us over, it’s Gummint Lite (amazon.com) and its suppliers:

Owners of Roald Dahl ebooks are having their libraries automatically updated with the new censored versions containing hundreds of changes to language related to weight, mental health, violence, gender and race. Readers who bought electronic versions of the writer’s books, such as Matilda and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, before the controversial updates have discovered their copies have now been changed.

Puffin Books, the company which publishes Dahl novels, updated the electronic novels, in which Augustus Gloop is no longer described as fat or Mrs Twit as fearfully ugly, on devices such as the Amazon Kindle.

Dahl’s biographer Matthew Dennison last night accused the publisher of “strong-arming readers into accepting a new orthodoxy in which Dahl himself has played no part.”

I think it’s the “automatically” part that gets to me — even though I don’t have Kindle or any ebooks.

Thanks but no thanks. Paper, Dead Tree, whatever you want to call it, are mine, all mine. As for Kindle: turning them into “kindling” would be my suggestion.

Baby Vulcan Smiles

Corporate Wokism, Resistance

We Texans love our guns, and therefore our gun stores.  So when some Noo Yawk assholes start fucking around with the latter, we take action:

Citigroup Inc. is once again facing an ouster from the booming Texas municipal-bond market after the state’s Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office determined the bank “discriminates” against the firearms industry. 

The ruling indicates that the New York-based bank runs afoul of a Republican-backed law passed nearly two years ago that bars most government contracts with companies that engage in anti-gun business practices. The decision appears to halt the bank’s ability to underwrite most municipal-bond offerings in the state.

It’s a whipsaw moment for Citigroup. The bank had temporarily halted its work in the Texas muni market after the law went into effect in September 2021 but had revived that business two months later, saying it complies with the law. Paxton’s ruling ends a months-long probe into Citi’s corporate policy.

“It has been determined that Citigroup has a policy that discriminates against a firearm entity or firearm trade association,” Leslie Brock, assistant attorney general chief of the public finance division, wrote in the letter. 

The determination means that Citigroup’s so-called standing letter, a document that had thus far allowed the bank to underwrite debt in one of the nation’s largest public bond markets, has been rejected, according to a Jan. 18 letter distributed to lawyers and viewed by Bloomberg.

“Therefore, until further notice, we will not approve any public security issued on or after today’s date in which Citigroup purchases or underwrites the public security, or in which Citigroup is otherwise a party to a covered contract relating to the public security,” according to the letter.

Of course, Citi’s acting all butt-hurt:

“We’re disappointed with the decision and will remain engaged with the Texas AG office to review our options,” said Mark Costiglio, a Citigroup spokesperson, in an emailed statement. “Citi has been financing public works in Texas for more than 150 years and we currently have more than 8,500 employees who call Texas home. As we’ve said previously, Citi does not discriminate against the firearms sector and believe we are in compliance with Texas law.”

Well, our legal guys say you do, and therefore you aren’t.

Yankee shitheads. Fuck ’em.

Boycott The Boycotters?

Corporate Wokism, Marketing / Advertising

As far as I know, these are the advertisers who have “paused” their presence on Twatter since Elon Musk took over:

  • Audi — can’t afford their overpriced cars anyway
  • General Mills — so much for that weekly box of Cheerios in the cart
  • General Motors — never on my list because crap cars and trucks
  • Mondelez International (formerly Kraft [Snack] Foods)– never cared for Oreos, Triscuits, Ritz and TUC either.  As for their chocolate brands, I can only see a problem with Cadbury (hello Lindt)  and Fry’s — massive concern from New Wife, who loves their Turkish Delight
  • Pfizer — pfuckem, not going to get another ‘Rona jab anyway
  • Volkswagen — well, that’s a real stinker.  As a lifetime buyer of VW cars, wagons and vans (7 or 8 so far), I guess I’ll just have to break the VW habit and look elsewhere for a replacement for the Tiguan when the time comes, as long as it’s not Chev or Audi (hello… Mazda?).

Also:

Advertising companies Interpublic Group—with clients like CVS and Nintendo—and Havas Media—whose clients include O2, Hyundai, and Domino’s Pizza—have recommended to their clients to pause paid advertising on Twitter, Forbes reported.

No more Rx from CVS, then (hello Wal-Mart or Kroger), and I’ve never been a user / consumer of the others.

One person (Yer Humble Narrator) can’t do much, it seems, when it comes to making these assholes pay for their wokedom.  Let’s hope there are a lot more people who think the way I do.

And remember:  not being a Twatter adherent myself, I actually care little about whatever happens to them.  What gets up my nose is the Leftist reaction (note the players) to Musk’s avowed intent to make the company less stridently Left-wing and fervently anti-conservative.  Maybe he should just fire more Twatter employees as a result of lowered ad revenue.

Not Applicable

Corporate Wokism

(This post first created on Friday 10/7)

From the Wokistas at PayPal, telling me about the changes to their conditions of business:

You may not use the PayPal service for activities that:
1. violate any law, statute, ordinance or regulation.
2. relate to transactions involving (a) narcotics, steroids, certain controlled substances or other products that present a risk to consumer safety, (b) drug paraphernalia, (c) cigarettes, (d) items that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity, (e) stolen goods including digital and virtual goods, (f) the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory or the financial exploitation of a crime, (g) items that are considered obscene, (h) items that infringe or violate any copyright, trademark, right of publicity or privacy or any other proprietary right under the laws of any jurisdiction, (i) certain sexually oriented materials or services, (j) ammunition, firearms, or certain firearm parts or accessories, or (k) certain weapons or knives regulated under applicable law.

Before anyone gets all upset (on my behalf), let me just say that I have never ever purchased any of the above highlighted items using PayPal.

Nope;  I first transfer the PayPal funds into my bank account, and then I go off and buy guns, ammo, MAGA hats, knives/bayonets, and sex toys that have the word “nigger” printed on them.

Just wanted to clear that all up.

Update (10/8):  Oh looky here:  PayPal has revoked part of their policy, saying:

PayPal has backtracked on a published policy that would have fined users $2,500 for spreading “misinformation,” claiming the update had gone out “in error.”  [Yeah, I bet it did.  Fuckers. — Kim]

“An AUP notice recently went out in error that included incorrect information. PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy. Our teams are working to correct our policy pages. We’re sorry for the confusion this has caused,” a spokesperson told National Review in a written statement.

The course reversal comes after the policy changes had started to attract media scrutiny as well as criticism on Twitter. Former PayPal president David Marcus even blasted the company over the implication that it could seize customers’ money for finding their views objectionable.

I wonder if they’d find this “objectionable”:

You pathetic little banker-wannabes are a bunch of lousy, wokist motherfuckers, and I hope states like Texas stop doing business with you altogether, and millions of your account-holders close their accounts rather than be subject to your pissy little regulations.

I’m taking a different tack.

Try and “fine” me by stealing money from my account without my written permission.  I fucking dare you.

‘nother Update (10/9):

I just closed my account.  Fuck ’em.