It's a slogan of people irrationally threatened by the mention of inclusiveness in society and who can see it being taken up as a mostly cynical marketing tool of corporations and reminding them a bit more than they like. It's supposed to worry said corporations that the irrationally threatened also have some consumer influence.
This is the right wing take on commercial entities unwisely dipping their toes into the culture wars or, politics in general.
Lots of companies have always donated to political parties and usually get some benefits in return. Many have given to good causes too, sometimes publicising it. But public advocacy for any political stance can now be toxic to your business in the current culture wars. You could be alienating a chunk of your customers for no good reason. Daft. A sensible business person buys from and sells to anyone they legally can. I really don't care if my customers glue themselves to roads, support Trump or worship Satan. Their politics are their own and they have a right to hold any view they wish. My prejudices should not affect the way I treat them.
Given how politicians and activists have radicalised almost everything, it is necessary to increase oversight in commercial activity and check that you aren't going to wipe out your business by starting a boycott against it. This used to just be an issue with thin-skinned dictatorships - calling Taiwan a country etc. But now, every social media activist and populist politician is looking for a fight to prove their moral purity at someone else's expense. Don't let that someone be you.
Corporations are often disaster prone with stuff like advertising and random tweets, so you really need someone streetwise and competent to be overseeing all of your public comments to keep them benign and inoffensive to everyone.
If you sell gizmos, talk about gizmos on your social media and have witty, amusing adverts that don't touch on politics. Or you might end up like Disney, with your local politicians coming after you. If the Democrats take down Trump in the courts, DeSantis could become President. Then Disney may really be stuffed. Budweiser also goofed.
So, leave divisive politics out of your business. By all means modernise, but do it in-house, silently, in ways that permit change without annoying people. Example: The LGBT toilet issue. Replace gendered toilet blocks with single cubicles for everyone (with disabled access), giving everyone the chance to pee in private.
The celebrities you choose to advertise your goods can also be a problem. Mr. Clean may suddenly turn out to not be quite as clean as he seemed. For this reason, more companies are using animated characters or plushies in their ads. If the ads are good enough you may sell a lot of goods on the back of them.
Only if you have a very specific, limited sales demographic, can you pander to it, politically and culturally. And even then, you may be skating on thinner ice than you think. Activists divide and fall out with each other at the drop of a hat.
We live in interesting times. Businesses need to adapt and evolve to avoid becoming political footballs and taking a kicking.
It means, companies that decide to push a social political agenda that the majority don’t want down their throats will suffer via a boycott and that’s a good thing in a capitalist democracy.
All companies now have social agenda on the environment, not having goods manufactured in Asian sweatshops, female directors on the board, local community issues.
All companies now have social agenda on the environment, not having goods manufactured in Asian sweatshops, female directors on the board, local community issues.
Well, pivoting back to consumer products. And sadly, you don’t get to dictate how the market works, I get your overall point, but pushing gay and transgender issues and other progressive social issues down everyone’s throats is giving their companies serious heartburn.
Anheuser Busch, Target, Papa John’s pizza, Kohl’s, they are the ones losing money, no sweat off the consumers back to shop somewhere else. So if if they push these issues, they’re done, that simple. These companies don’t get the final say, the consumer does.
It's a simple, catchy expression used by the type of straight, white men who genuinely believe that straight, white men are the most discriminated against minority in the recorded history of humans.
Essentially, it is virtue signalling.
I remember the same type of man in the UK saying "there ain't no black in the Union Jack".
This phrase was originally intended to be used against hollywood, which meant that as long as hollywood cared more about pandering to left leaning "social justice" issues with no care for the quality of the plot or characters of a show or movie (think gender and/or race swapping being the main draw of a movie), people wouldn't be that interested to be preached, and therefore the audience would deminish.
The idea was that people weren't dumb enough to beleive corporations that just pander to whatever social issue that makes them seem like they "care", as a way to shield for their lack of ideas, content or just plain awful corporate culture.
But currently, socially right leaning people have started to use the phrase more as a rejection of any corporation showing any kind of support for sexual minorities, as they beleive that sexual minorities should dissappear from public view.
Identity politics, whether labelled "woke" or not, are a massive distraction to fool people into hating minorities or excessively focusing on and defending minorities while the elite steal off all the cash.
There is massive growing inequality. People should hate on Obama because he was part of this, not defend him because he's black or respects his wife as a woman or said something not unkind about gay people.
Not a damn thing. Just some weak phrase people on the far right like to use when they have no real points to their argument. Although I agree with them on some issues, I don't recall seeing any companies or famous individual they don't like go broke. Someone quick: Name one company that has gone broke. I thought so. Sales dropping and going broke are not the same.
the great Matt Walsh, more than anyone, helped bring down Bud Light and Anheuser Busch to the tune of $27 Billion in stock value in the past few months.
2019 supercharged brand involvement in issues of social responsibility. But as more of these stories come to light, the more polarising these issues can become. Do businesses, of all sizes, risk losing mass reach if they continue to pursue a ‘woke’ strategy?
The phrase ‘Get woke, go broke’ originated after a paper by John Ringo was published online in 2018 (since deleted) that refers to the rise of organisations using politically correct actions as part of their strategy, only for that to result in a massive loss of income because they have abandoned mass reach. It soon gained some cut-through and has been regularly used in online analysis of businesses as diverse as Gillette and Disney, even if it has not quite come up in more mainstream channels.
The origins of this rather irritating phase could have huge implications/ramifications/importanceto a companies business model future success.
Stick to the basics, stay out of politically compelling narratives, masquerading as a means. or in the belief that surreptitiously/sanctimoniously, take your pick, can offer the holy grail of new revenue streams.
It's simply numbers. Non-woke people are still the majority, but woke people are louder, which is understandable, woke people want changes, and when your numbers are low, all you can do is be loud.
Combined buying power of non-woke still far higher than woke people, and since people dislike changes, they'll support things that are familiar to them and dislike the new. It's simply human nature, the most liberal average Americans would not enjoy watching Noh, for example.
And, the phrase came from financial results, highlighting the the incredible hubris and dictatorial ramblings by Larry Fink, the CEO of BlackRock, the world’s largest hedge fund with $10 trillion (with a t) in assets. It’s unknown to most people, but BlackRock pretty much owns the world.
He famously proclaimed in 2017 that he and companies they invest in must “force behaviors” in diversity and environmental issues. And he will force it.
Fink is single handedly the person most responsible for the woke culture you see today. He led the country to stack universities with woke administrative staff to enforce indoctrination. He’s a great fan of China and communism. A financial communist, which is basically dictatorship. Dictators are rich and control everything, which is his goal.
And few people know of him. It’s scary. He’s a believer in the Golden Rule - the man with all the gold makes the rules.
It means "Here is a distraction for the simple -minded, scared micropenised White men with no skills, to stop them ever thinking about how the GQP is hell-bent on keeping them poor, uneducated and shot at".
The whole idea of "Woke" people has lately being usurped by the social right.
"Woke" people used to mean "obnoxious super lefty white cis-male that believes they are protecting minorities by insulting others for not being as enlightened or 'woke' as them", which was a very particular type of loud obnoxious person hated by literally everyone except themselves (or maybe even themselves).
But some on the social right have basically usurped the word, and made it into "anyone who is not social conservative".
Ahistorical and betrays a profound lack of political knowledge Peter Neil.
Here we go, only liberals know what Communism is, it’s just a system that only they were ordained to know, you have to study at a 4 year institution to know the meaning of the word. Lol
Communism would be nationalizing and appropriating all of Blackstone's assets and sending him to a reeducation camp for human rights abuses like this:
Well, that’s not going to happen.
The union of corporate and authoritarian power is just fascism. As Mussolini pointed out.
A company decides to divide its market sector based on the life values of a minority, thereby destroying the unity of its customers.
So the phrase simply means the potential economic result of a company that gives in to the vocal minority of extremist far left issues that often go against traditional American values, and then the company tries to shove the message of those fringe groups down the throats of the public, which might or might not be interested in the issue, until it becomes apparent that the company is now promoting not just the product, but also the whining of the "perpetually offended", and thus the public takes swift action to reject that hailstorm of living values that conflict with their own, by rejecting the company and its product.
”something a white person with wrap around sunglasses in their profile picture would say when reading/confronted with a common sense piece of information purely because it comes from a nonwhite person/a political leader they support”
”crocodiles are dangerous!”:agreed
black woman says they are dangerous “they ain’t that bad! Your just woke” seems to be the trend lol
And the only argument you can come up with is the infamous AOC not understanding the difference between a govt handout and tax cuts/ credits? Then opposed the creation of thousands of well-paying jobs?
*And in a further question related to the terms of the deal which so incensed AOC, *a margin of 61 percent to 30 percent stated that they were in favor of the $3 billion in state and city incentives that Amazon was due to receive for bringing 25,000 jobs to New York.
It's a backlash by the majority of people who are tired of political correctness and all of the destruction that it is causing. It's a backlash against a loud minority who are filled with H8.
41 Comments
Login to comment
Moonraker
It's a slogan of people irrationally threatened by the mention of inclusiveness in society and who can see it being taken up as a mostly cynical marketing tool of corporations and reminding them a bit more than they like. It's supposed to worry said corporations that the irrationally threatened also have some consumer influence.
Peter Neil
Or how about this:
Pander to a small demographic with more vocal volume than money and watch your margins and valuation shrink.
Sven Asai
It speaks for itself. If you have to ask or don’t know the answer, you are already on the path to go broke.
GBR48
This is the right wing take on commercial entities unwisely dipping their toes into the culture wars or, politics in general.
Lots of companies have always donated to political parties and usually get some benefits in return. Many have given to good causes too, sometimes publicising it. But public advocacy for any political stance can now be toxic to your business in the current culture wars. You could be alienating a chunk of your customers for no good reason. Daft. A sensible business person buys from and sells to anyone they legally can. I really don't care if my customers glue themselves to roads, support Trump or worship Satan. Their politics are their own and they have a right to hold any view they wish. My prejudices should not affect the way I treat them.
Given how politicians and activists have radicalised almost everything, it is necessary to increase oversight in commercial activity and check that you aren't going to wipe out your business by starting a boycott against it. This used to just be an issue with thin-skinned dictatorships - calling Taiwan a country etc. But now, every social media activist and populist politician is looking for a fight to prove their moral purity at someone else's expense. Don't let that someone be you.
Corporations are often disaster prone with stuff like advertising and random tweets, so you really need someone streetwise and competent to be overseeing all of your public comments to keep them benign and inoffensive to everyone.
If you sell gizmos, talk about gizmos on your social media and have witty, amusing adverts that don't touch on politics. Or you might end up like Disney, with your local politicians coming after you. If the Democrats take down Trump in the courts, DeSantis could become President. Then Disney may really be stuffed. Budweiser also goofed.
So, leave divisive politics out of your business. By all means modernise, but do it in-house, silently, in ways that permit change without annoying people. Example: The LGBT toilet issue. Replace gendered toilet blocks with single cubicles for everyone (with disabled access), giving everyone the chance to pee in private.
The celebrities you choose to advertise your goods can also be a problem. Mr. Clean may suddenly turn out to not be quite as clean as he seemed. For this reason, more companies are using animated characters or plushies in their ads. If the ads are good enough you may sell a lot of goods on the back of them.
Only if you have a very specific, limited sales demographic, can you pander to it, politically and culturally. And even then, you may be skating on thinner ice than you think. Activists divide and fall out with each other at the drop of a hat.
We live in interesting times. Businesses need to adapt and evolve to avoid becoming political footballs and taking a kicking.
wallace
A right-wing echo chamber.
bass4funk
It means, companies that decide to push a social political agenda that the majority don’t want down their throats will suffer via a boycott and that’s a good thing in a capitalist democracy.
wallace
All companies now have social agenda on the environment, not having goods manufactured in Asian sweatshops, female directors on the board, local community issues.
bass4funk
Well, pivoting back to consumer products. And sadly, you don’t get to dictate how the market works, I get your overall point, but pushing gay and transgender issues and other progressive social issues down everyone’s throats is giving their companies serious heartburn.
Anheuser Busch, Target, Papa John’s pizza, Kohl’s, they are the ones losing money, no sweat off the consumers back to shop somewhere else. So if if they push these issues, they’re done, that simple. These companies don’t get the final say, the consumer does.
TaiwanIsNotChina
It means that rightists think they have economic power. Usually they are proved wrong.
Jimizo
At first, it was being used as an iron law of business but it quickly became apparent that it was leaking like a sieve.
These days it’s more of a rallying cry for people upset about certain things and want others to be upset too.
It’s losing steam.
bass4funk
Well, given the fact that many of these companies are hemorrhaging sales service of the biggest companies, I would to say, you’re wrong.
Jimizo
Do you think it should be amended to ‘Go woke, possibly or perhaps go broke?’
More accurate but not quite as snappy.
bass4funk
No.
kintsugi
Will the GOP stop accepting donations from those companies? Probably not.
Paustovsky
It's a simple, catchy expression used by the type of straight, white men who genuinely believe that straight, white men are the most discriminated against minority in the recorded history of humans.
Essentially, it is virtue signalling.
I remember the same type of man in the UK saying "there ain't no black in the Union Jack".
Luis David Yanez
It means different things to different people.
This phrase was originally intended to be used against hollywood, which meant that as long as hollywood cared more about pandering to left leaning "social justice" issues with no care for the quality of the plot or characters of a show or movie (think gender and/or race swapping being the main draw of a movie), people wouldn't be that interested to be preached, and therefore the audience would deminish.
The idea was that people weren't dumb enough to beleive corporations that just pander to whatever social issue that makes them seem like they "care", as a way to shield for their lack of ideas, content or just plain awful corporate culture.
But currently, socially right leaning people have started to use the phrase more as a rejection of any corporation showing any kind of support for sexual minorities, as they beleive that sexual minorities should dissappear from public view.
kohakuebisu
Identity politics, whether labelled "woke" or not, are a massive distraction to fool people into hating minorities or excessively focusing on and defending minorities while the elite steal off all the cash.
There is massive growing inequality. People should hate on Obama because he was part of this, not defend him because he's black or respects his wife as a woman or said something not unkind about gay people.
Mocheake
Not a damn thing. Just some weak phrase people on the far right like to use when they have no real points to their argument. Although I agree with them on some issues, I don't recall seeing any companies or famous individual they don't like go broke. Someone quick: Name one company that has gone broke. I thought so. Sales dropping and going broke are not the same.
Babe Ruth
the great Matt Walsh, more than anyone, helped bring down Bud Light and Anheuser Busch to the tune of $27 Billion in stock value in the past few months.
Go woke, go broke!
itsonlyrocknroll
The question really pertains to....
When brands go woke, do they go broke?
https://www.cim.co.uk/content-hub/editorial/when-brands-go-woke-do-they-go-broke/
2019 supercharged brand involvement in issues of social responsibility. But as more of these stories come to light, the more polarising these issues can become. Do businesses, of all sizes, risk losing mass reach if they continue to pursue a ‘woke’ strategy?
The phrase ‘Get woke, go broke’ originated after a paper by John Ringo was published online in 2018 (since deleted) that refers to the rise of organisations using politically correct actions as part of their strategy, only for that to result in a massive loss of income because they have abandoned mass reach. It soon gained some cut-through and has been regularly used in online analysis of businesses as diverse as Gillette and Disney, even if it has not quite come up in more mainstream channels.
The origins of this rather irritating phase could have huge implications/ramifications/importance to a companies business model future success.
Stick to the basics, stay out of politically compelling narratives, masquerading as a means. or in the belief that surreptitiously/sanctimoniously, take your pick, can offer the holy grail of new revenue streams.
Be warned
kibousha
It's simply numbers. Non-woke people are still the majority, but woke people are louder, which is understandable, woke people want changes, and when your numbers are low, all you can do is be loud.
Combined buying power of non-woke still far higher than woke people, and since people dislike changes, they'll support things that are familiar to them and dislike the new. It's simply human nature, the most liberal average Americans would not enjoy watching Noh, for example.
The very definition of voting with their wallet.
Babe Ruth
Woke people want unearned power as well as attention for their faux concern for the plight of the human race.
bass4funk
No, they would.
wallace
The right sure loves a lot of ‘woke’ companies
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/06/06/right-sure-loves-lot-woke-companies/
Peter Neil
And, the phrase came from financial results, highlighting the the incredible hubris and dictatorial ramblings by Larry Fink, the CEO of BlackRock, the world’s largest hedge fund with $10 trillion (with a t) in assets. It’s unknown to most people, but BlackRock pretty much owns the world.
He famously proclaimed in 2017 that he and companies they invest in must “force behaviors” in diversity and environmental issues. And he will force it.
Fink is single handedly the person most responsible for the woke culture you see today. He led the country to stack universities with woke administrative staff to enforce indoctrination. He’s a great fan of China and communism. A financial communist, which is basically dictatorship. Dictators are rich and control everything, which is his goal.
And few people know of him. It’s scary. He’s a believer in the Golden Rule - the man with all the gold makes the rules.
Derek Grebe
It means "Here is a distraction for the simple -minded, scared micropenised White men with no skills, to stop them ever thinking about how the GQP is hell-bent on keeping them poor, uneducated and shot at".
John-San
It directed at the entertainment industry. E.G. New Spider-Man film pulled from cinema programs in Arab world, possibly over transgender flag
Luis David Yanez
Here is the thing.
The whole idea of "Woke" people has lately being usurped by the social right.
"Woke" people used to mean "obnoxious super lefty white cis-male that believes they are protecting minorities by insulting others for not being as enlightened or 'woke' as them", which was a very particular type of loud obnoxious person hated by literally everyone except themselves (or maybe even themselves).
But some on the social right have basically usurped the word, and made it into "anyone who is not social conservative".
dagon
Ahistorical and betrays a profound lack of political knowledge Peter Neil.
Communism would be nationalizing and appropriating all of Blackstone's assets and sending him to a reeducation camp for human rights abuses like this:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/26/blackstone-group-accused-global-housing-crisis-un
The union of corporate and authoritarian power is just fascism. As Mussolini pointed out.
https://chipublib.bibliocommons.com/list/share/204842963/1292628717
Blackstone is the enemy yes, but obviously his strategy is working as you focus on "woke academics" and minority rights.
Ah_so
It's a phrase the far right use to attack companies that don't share their prejudices.
bass4funk
https://www.delish.com/food-news/a44156455/chick-fil-a-boycott/
Picking steam
Here we go, only liberals know what Communism is, it’s just a system that only they were ordained to know, you have to study at a 4 year institution to know the meaning of the word. Lol
Well, that’s not going to happen.
What??? Oh, dear lord…
Why?
CPTOMO
A company decides to divide its market sector based on the life values of a minority, thereby destroying the unity of its customers.
So the phrase simply means the potential economic result of a company that gives in to the vocal minority of extremist far left issues that often go against traditional American values, and then the company tries to shove the message of those fringe groups down the throats of the public, which might or might not be interested in the issue, until it becomes apparent that the company is now promoting not just the product, but also the whining of the "perpetually offended", and thus the public takes swift action to reject that hailstorm of living values that conflict with their own, by rejecting the company and its product.
GillislowTier
what it means to me:
”something a white person with wrap around sunglasses in their profile picture would say when reading/confronted with a common sense piece of information purely because it comes from a nonwhite person/a political leader they support”
”crocodiles are dangerous!”:agreed
black woman says they are dangerous “they ain’t that bad! Your just woke” seems to be the trend lol
shogun36
Ask Bud Light, they now know what that means.
dagon
Democrats are the real corporatists?
Maybe the neo-liberal centrists but not the real 'leftists' you hate so much
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/amazon-building-washington-dc-aoc-b2293792.html
They oppose socialism for the rich, unlike you and yours.
That is 'woke', so workers won't be broke.
Babe Ruth
Yes. and everyone knows it.
And the only argument you can come up with is the infamous AOC not understanding the difference between a govt handout and tax cuts/ credits? Then opposed the creation of thousands of well-paying jobs?
https://www.ccn.com/new-york-voters-blame-amazon-fiasco-on-villain-ocasio-cortez/
Oh dear.
One of the greatest socialist failures of the past 25 years (and there are many) and you point it out as a virtue???
Go woke, go broke.
dagon
Your link from 2019 vs. mine from 2023.
She was proven right in opposing socialism for the rich.
Your arguments and support are as stale and weak as your homily "Go woke, go broke."
It collapses in the face of logic and evidence and you are out of your league.
V Campbell
It's a backlash by the majority of people who are tired of political correctness and all of the destruction that it is causing. It's a backlash against a loud minority who are filled with H8.
Babe Ruth
https://babylonbee.com/news/ocasio-cortez-gets-her-head-stuck-in-a-bucket-nations-journalists-quickly-explain-why-it-was-a-really-smart-thing-to-do
Babe Ruth
She was so right she lost 25000 New Yorkers well paying jobs LOL
dagon
You realize that is a conservative parody site like a right wing Onion?
I guess it is appropriate for a satirical parody poster of right wing talking points.