http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/02/chick-fil-a-appreciation-day-sets-record-restaurant-chain-says/?hpt=hp_t3

What is seen with activists is the belief that they can boycott a company and cause it to change its way.  They operate under the assumption that prople outraged at a company will cause the company to be hurt so badly, it changes its views.

However, what happens when you have a situation where an issue is divisive and polarizes?  Apparently with the whole Chik-Fil-A bruhaha, calls to boycott and protest lead people on the other side to do the opposite, to get people to shop at the place.  End result?  Well, the company apparently set sales records on Appreciation Day.

So, I would have a question: In case of polarizing issues, can a boycott really be effective, or does it just make a company a stronger niche brand and improves its bottom line by creating a stronger identity for itself?  I would ask to focus on the effect of a boycott here, rather than have this turn into a discussion over gay marriage.  I say this request because there is another thread on that subject.  Also, it doesn't help any regarding the issue if people on one side or another are spun as spawns of evil.

The problem is that people who really enjoyed eating at Chik-Fil-A likely aren't going to care enough to stop, even if they may disagree with the company's views, and then this whole thing seems to come into the realm of "any publicity is good publicity" because Chik-Fil-A's been a trending search topic for weeks now, and so long as you aren't strongly pro-gay-marriage, the company name is in your head, which is a win for them.

Almost makes you wonder if the CEO made his statements with that intent.

Honestly, I would say it really depends on how closely the supporters of an issue match up to the base of a company ...

Johnson and Johnson makes sure to advertise itself as a "family company" because mothers buy a large portion of the products and generally hold a series of similar values. When the company does anything that is seen as being against these values it acts quickly to prevent (or respond to) a boycot because a small portion of these customers acting against them can have a huge impact.

While I don't have any evidence of this, I suspect that a fried-meat based fast food restaurant would generally have customers that were disproportionately in favour of traditional forms of marriage; and the loss of a handful of customers who probably weren't going to eat there anyways was tiny compared to the customers who wanted to show support for one of their favourite restaurants because they stood for the same cause.

@Mr Khan
That wasn't the owners intent. -_-. Chick fil a is freaking closed on Sunday. They are a christian corporation. Are you surprised he would stand up against an act that the bible explicitly states as immoral and repugnant? Didn't his father teach sunday school for what... 71 years or something?

Left wing or right wing, i would doubt anyone who helms a major corporation of acting altruistically when the result is money in their pockets.

I was wondering why the local one was completely full at 2 o'clock yesterday

Actually, besides the quote, Chik-Fil-A has gotten into trouble for donating food (and I believe some money) to organizations said to support the traditional definition of money.  If there were just concerned with the bottom line, they wouldn't be getting the flak they have been.  Chik-Fil-A has issues now because they are more than just a money grubbing entity.  They, for example, are not open on Sundays, which costs them profits.

@Mr Khan
I don't think closing on Sundays(day when many churchgoers pack people in restaurants), is wise business practice. -_-. In fact, i bet sunday is one of the most lucrative days of business for restaurants. Believe what yyou want I suppose. If anyone was fishing for sales, it was Oreo's weak attempt to satiate the liberals by feigning interest in gay rights. -_-

I don't eat much fast food but lines were out the door and around the block at the local one

Sure it can. Just depends on the makeup of the user base/enthusiasm of each side.

The concentrated effort to boycott Glenn Beck seemed to work pretty well... despite good ratings, his show got canned because people called up companies protested and boycotted.


The Boycott probably would of worked if Chik-Fil-A was a crappier restaurant chain.

As it is, they rank number 1 for quality when it comes to chicken sandwiches, and what the guy did wasn't THAT strong a motivator. He said one thing, and he donates his own money to certain causes.


Throw into that people who

A) Agree with him

B) Haven't had Chick fil-a in a while

C) The anti-PC Backlash...

and the situation isn't THAT surprising.