Castro business owners see spike in business during Pride Month
(KRON) – While it's always Pride in the San Francisco neighborhood Castro District, the month of June means an increase in people and revenue to the businesses.
On an average year, the city of San Francisco welcomes around a million visitors to celebrate Pride, according to SF Pride. Visitors pour money into the local economy, supporting hotels and restaurants.
Pride Month starts this weekend. Here's what to expect
The spike in tourists makes June the third busiest month of the year for the city, behind December and October.
The owner of the Cliff's Variety Store told KRON4 that he sees a 20 to 25% increase in revenue in the month of June. Local businesses are expecting to see a similar boost in sales. By some estimates, Pride brings in around 500 million dollars in revenue for the city.
The annual Pride Parade is scheduled for June 29 on Market Street.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fast Company
3 hours ago
- Fast Company
Pride Month is looking very beige this year
Branded is a weekly column devoted to the intersection of marketing, business, design, and culture. Pride Month is looking a little different this year—at least when it comes to corporate brands. For years, big brands and retailers have broadcast their (at least symbolic) support for the LGBTQ+ community through everything from social media accounts tweaked with rainbow-flag colors to special Pride merch collections and sponsorship of established parades and other events. But in the first year of a second Trump presidency, the administration has expressed noisy hostility toward 'diversity' in general, and as a corporate value specifically. It has been particularly hostile toward the trans community, for example, banning transgender service members from the military and introducing legislation that would curtail gender-affirming healthcare. All this has evidently quieted some businesses' Pride participation: A Gravity Research poll found that 39% of hundreds of surveyed companies 'plan to reduce Pride-related engagement' this year—and none planned to increase Pride engagement. A startling 65% reported they were preparing for potential backlash to whatever support they showed. Anecdotal evidence backs up the idea of a more cautious corporate Pride approach. The Wall Street Journal reported that Mastercard, Nissan, and other brands did not continue their sponsorship of the famous New York City Pride March. NYC Pride, which organizes the parade and related events, has said it is facing a budget shortfall this year. As Newsweek recently noted, brands from BMW to NFL teams that have added rainbow visuals to their logos in the past aren't doing so this year. Target, which has been known to treat Pride as a major marketing event—a practice that attracted conservative criticism and boycott calls—remains an NYC Pride corporate partner. But many on social media have roasted its 2025 Pride collection as bland and defensive. In fairness, Target's collection usually gets some roasting, but this year the theme was its noticeable non-noticeable aesthetic—'primarily inspired by the color beige,' as one review put it. View this post on Instagram A post shared by connor clary (@ In a notably blunt example of a brand rethinking its Pride strategy, a leaked Slack message from the pet-toy subscription service BarkBox sought to explain why the company was pausing promotion of its Pride Collection, featuring items such as the Proud Pup Rainbow Tug and Daddy Dolphin toy: 'Right now,' it stated, 'pushing this promo risks unintentionally sending the message that 'we're not for you' to a large portion of our audience,' referring to the Pride products as 'politically charged.' This was heavily criticized, and BarkBox CEO Matt Meeker apologized, saying the message 'doesn't reflect our values,' and noting its Pride-themed merch was still very much available. (Earlier, a former Trump attorney complained on social media about receiving Pride-themed BarkBox products; after Meeker's apology, she announced that she would cancel her subscription.) View this post on Instagram A post shared by Spencer Meade (@spennyislennie) While a politically polarized atmosphere is clearly playing a role in the apparent tamping down of many brands' embrace of Pride, it's worth acknowledging that this embrace has always been met with a certain skepticism. The argument that corporate alignment with Pride always had more to do with courting customers than supporting gay or transgender rights is sometimes summarized as ' rainbow capitalism '—a largely superficial practice that may have aided LGBTQ+ social acceptance, but did so as essentially a side effect of the profit motive. In fact, recent Pew Research Center polling found that 68% of LGBTQ+ adults (and 54% of non-LGBTQ+ adults) believe that companies promoting Pride Month do so primarily because it 'helps business.' Only 16% and 13%, respectively, believe a 'genuine desire to celebrate' LGBTQ+ people as the prime motivation. (The remainder believe such promotion is the result of 'pressure to support' LGBTQ+ people. About 61% of non-LGBTQ+ Republicans agreed with that, compared to around 30% of Democrats, according to Pew.) In addition to noting companies' stated plans to scale back public engagement with Pride this year, the Gravity Research survey noted that most 'internal initiatives' connected to LGBTQ+ rights are continuing. 'As polarization deepens, brands are favoring lower-profile, internally focused strategies that minimize public exposure while signaling commitment to employees,' the report said. The handful of brands sticking with pro-LGBTQ+ messages this Pride Month are winning some praise for positive, productive campaigns—from Mac cosmetics making a $1 million donation (its largest) to several LGBTQ+-focused nonprofits in connection with a new Kim Petras lip gloss collaboration, to Ikea donating proceeds from certain projects to LGBTQ+ charities and sponsoring the San Francisco Pride Parade, to a Levi's collection with a $100,000 donation to nonprofit Outright International, which focuses on LGBTQ+ human rights. The skittishness of their peers just makes these efforts look that much more sincere. And definitely less beige.
Fast Company
3 hours ago
- Fast Company
How to know if a company is actually LGBTQ+ inclusive (before you accept the job)
As LGBTQ+ job seekers navigate a landscape marked by layoffs, economic uncertainty, and a shifting political climate, one question rises to the top: How can I know if a company is genuinely inclusive before I accept this job offer? While many companies show support for LGBTQ+ employees during Pride Month, the true measure of inclusivity is how a company fosters belonging 365 days a year. And the reality is that while some companies may appear inclusive on the surface, the level of genuine inclusion can vary widely from organization to organization. As a career expert who exists at the intersection of Black and LGBTQ+ spaces, I've seen firsthand the challenges queer professionals face in finding workplaces that truly embrace who we are. LinkedIn's Belonging Blueprint, an LGBTQ+ job seeker's guide, acknowledges a core truth: there's no one way to be LGBTQ+ at work. Our research finds that only 35% of American LGBTQ+ professionals feel safe bringing their full selves to work, and three in four have code-switched in the workplace. These statistics underscore the fact that many workplaces still have significant work to do when it comes to creating truly inclusive environments. For LGBTQ+ professionals, inclusion isn't just about acceptance—it's about being able to show up authentically without hiding important parts of who we are. A 2024 survey by EY found that 40% of American LGBTQ+ professionals have left a job because they felt the workplace was not welcoming. Here are some tips to help evaluate whether a company is truly committed to inclusion before you sign the dotted line. Before You Apply, Understand How You Want to Show Up Before you even start looking at companies, take a moment to think about how you want to show up at work. For some of us, being open about being LGBTQ+ at work is nonnegotiable. For others, especially early in their careers, it may not be the top priority. Your journey and what you need from your work environment will evolve. I wasn't fully out at work until my thirties. More than a decade later, I'm married to another man and in the process of becoming a working father, so I need to work in a space where I can bring my authentic self to the table—no questions asked. Ask yourself: What do I need from my workplace to feel supported? This may be the freedom to express your full identity, or the flexibility to focus on other aspects of life, like family planning. Once you've defined your needs, look for companies that align with them. A good place to start is by reviewing the job description. Look for inclusive language like gender-neutral pronouns and references to queer-inclusive parental leave or family planning or employee resource groups (ERGs). These are signs of a company that has put thought into supporting LGBTQ+ employees. Engage Your Network and Read the Signs Friends won't let their gay friends work at anti-LGBTQ+ companies. Tap into your community, LinkedIn connections, or even your personal contacts to get insider insights about the company's culture. While job descriptions may present the shiny version, hearing directly from current or former employees will give you an unfiltered view of what it's really like to work there. Research the company the same ways they will research you. Some things to look for: Are there any out LGBTQ+ leaders at the company? What's the leadership like when it comes to LGBTQ+ issues? Has the company won any awards for LGBTQ+ inclusion? You need to assess whether the company's commitment to inclusion is truly embedded in their culture. Follow the company's website and check out executives on LinkedIn. If you spot executives who are people of color or women, that could signal the company's commitment to inclusive hiring and leadership development—which might indicate opportunities for growth for you as well. Finally, check trusted LGBTQ+ organizations like Stonewall, Human Rights Campaign, or GLAAD; many publish indexes or awards for LGBTQ+ workplace inclusion based on data and proven allyship. This helps distinguish companies that prioritize parades and logos from those that prioritize benefits and career progression. Most Americans work for small to medium-sized companies, so there might not be ERGs, index awards, or a lot of executives to research. But how employers treat employees from other minority groups can be a canary in the coal mine for queer job seekers. A conversation with a Black woman who's worked at a company may be equally as helpful to understanding a company's commitment to inclusion. Ask the Right Questions: What Do You Need from Work? The interview process is not just about proving you're the right fit for the job; it's also about ensuring the job is the right fit for you. It's your chance to test whether the company's commitment to LGBTQ+ inclusion is embedded in their culture year-round, or if it's just a seasonal initiative. The interview: Don't be afraid to ask questions during your interview. A good question to ask is: 'What does LGBTQ+ belonging look like at your company, year-round?' A company that's committed to inclusion will have a clear, actionable answer. If they can provide specific examples, like gender-neutral bathrooms, use of pronouns, mentorship programs, diverse panels, or active employee engagement around LGBTQ+ issues, that's a good sign they're truly invested in inclusivity. If they're vague or shy away from these topics, it might be time to continue your search. The benefits: A benefits package will tell you a lot about how much a company values its LGBTQ+ employees. Does the company offer gender-affirming care, fertility treatments, or queer-inclusive parental leave? If the benefits package includes support for domestic partners or trans health needs, it's a strong indicator they're serious about inclusivity. If the job offer doesn't make some of these benefits clear, LinkedIn's company pages can help you dig in. The big picture: Finally, don't just look at the benefits package, look at how the company has responded to broader LGBTQ+ rights issues. Has the company publicly supported the LGBTQ+ community? Not every company will answer these questions in the most affirming ways, but just thinking them through before you say yes can help you build a better strategy for finding the company that helps you thrive. We all deserve a workplace that appreciates our skills and offers the opportunity to be ourselves, drive impact, and grow. Your well-being and career are too important to settle for anything less.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Elon Musk-Trump spat on X is a distraction from the failures of DOGE
Elon Musk stepped down from his position as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) on May 30, only months after promising to transform government by cutting trillions of dollars from the federal budget and eliminating so-called 'waste, fraud and abuse.' Just a week later, Musk's relationship with President Donald Trump ― the man Musk spent nearly $300 million to elect — went up in flames, as Americans watched the drama unfold in real time on X and Truth Social. Trump publicly denounced Musk as 'disloyal' for criticizing the president's signature legislative effort, the 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' while Musk called the bill a 'disgusting abomination' and openly called for Trump's impeachment. The spectacle of the richest man in the world and the president of the United States exchanging insults online may be remembered as DOGE's final chapter in the public imagination. But it should not obscure the damage Musk wrought when he commanded one of the most powerful positions in the Trump administration. More from Freep Opinion: Democrats better hope Michigan Gov. Whitmer changes her mind about presidential run To start, Musk's promised savings never came. The DOGE website currently claims to have saved the public $175 billion through a range of actions like eliminating 'fraud and improper payment' and cancelling grants. But even that sum — which is believed to be falsely inflated through a combination of guesswork and suspect arithmetic — is less than 3% of the federal budget, and less than 9% of the $2 trillion in cuts Musk promised upon assuming his role. In other words, DOGE failed on Musk's own terms. What did materialize is an unprecedented attack on public institutions, beginning with the people who carry out the work of public service. According to the latest data, around 260,000 federal employees have either been forced out, been slated for cuts, or chosen to leave their posts since DOGE began its work. These aren't faceless 'bureaucrats.' They are the people who test our water for contaminants, inspect our food for harmful bacteria, and ensure air travel is safe, among other public services. The department with the highest number of planned terminations is Veterans Affairs, with up to 80,900 personnel serving our nation's veterans slated for future cuts, according to the New York Times. Many of these jobs are health care workers who care for veterans directly. More from Freep Opinion: I'm a gay man in Detroit. Celebrating Pride feels more important than ever In cutting both people and programs that provide essential services, DOGE attempted a bargain that Michiganders are painfully familiar with: treat government like a business, and attempt to cut public services to balance the books no matter the risks to public health, the economy or democracy. During our state's era of emergency management, decision-making power in several cities and school districts like Flint and Detroit shifted from democratically elected local officials to appointees of the governor. In Flint, a series of emergency managers focused on cost-cutting to address the city's financial crisis, including the ill-fated decision to switch the city's water source. The result was the worst man-made environmental catastrophe in American history. Flint should have been a warning to the country that 'efficiency' without regard for public welfare is a dangerous proposition. Yet DOGE was a far more extreme expression of this logic. Like Flint, the DOGE experiment is a grave warning about what happens when democracy is treated as a private enterprise rather than a public trust, when billionaires think they know best what people need in their own communities. And while it may take decades to account for the potential harms DOGE's actions might produce, we are already seeing some. Here in Michigan, DOGE reportedly canceled $394 million in federal public health grants, money that ultimately supports local health initiatives statewide. These cuts are not abstract. They will be felt in people's bodies and the broader society. Local health providers will have to cut back on critical services such as vaccine administration and interventions for substance use disorder. According to a 2019 study, every dollar invested in public health departments yields as much as $67 to $88 of benefits to society. DOGE also cut $15 million in AmeriCorps funding for our state, impacting programs that offered tutoring, support for seniors, and assistance for homeless residents. At a time when Michigan ranks 34th in the nation in overall child wellbeing, students in more than 60 school districts may see tutoring support disappear. This begs the question: Who ultimately benefited from Musk's relentless cutting? The clear answer is Elon Musk, who is $170 billion richer since endorsing Trump in the summer of 2024, even accounting for the drop in Tesla's stock attributed to the public backlash over DOGE's actions. (How this most recent fiasco will affect Musk's bottom line remains to be seen.) Meanwhile, DOGE spent months attempting to 'delete' entire agencies like the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which stops predatory banks from scamming veterans, seniors, and consumers in general. And it destroyed the IRS' ability to audit wealthy tax cheats, forcing workers and families to shoulder more of the nation's tax responsibility. DOGE has also made us less free. The initiative's most significant legacy may be what the writer Julia Anguin described as 'a sprawling domestic surveillance system for the Trump administration ― the likes of which we have never seen in the United States.' In agency after agency, Musk and his lieutenants accessed the most sensitive data about Americans and handled it with reckless disregard. Information like Social Security numbers and bank accounts that once stood in the relative safety of government silos are now being merged to create more sweeping surveillance tools than ever before. They could be used to further crack down on immigrants' speech, or to simply make it easier to target political enemies. This is what we're left with. A public more exposed to harm — from preventable diseases, from corporate predation and scams, from toxins in our air and water—and a small group of wealthy elites more empowered to dominate our government and our democracy. Perhaps this is why a solid majority of Americans disapprove of Musk's job performance, arguably accelerating his departure from government. The American public deserves a government that is fit for purpose and delivers on its promises. But Elon Musk never intended to create that. DOGE was built on the fiction of Musk's mastery of all things, one of the many myths attributed to the ultra-wealthy. What it concealed was a public sector novice who failed to understand the basic mechanics of the institutions he railed against. On the day Musk announced his departure, a lawsuit against him and DOGE was cleared to proceed, accusing him of wielding unlawful power over federal agencies, contracts and data without democratic oversight. It was a fitting coda. Musk left behind no durable reform, only institutions hollowed out, public trust frayed, and a template for how easily government can be turned against the people it exists to serve. Even this spectacular fallout with Trump should not distract from the wreckage he leaves behind. Bilal Baydoun is Director of Democratic Institutions at the Roosevelt Institute, a national policy think tank devoted to building on the legacy of FDR. A version of this column was previously published on the Roosevelt Institute's Substack. Submit a letter to the editor at and we may publish it online and in print. Like what you're reading? Please consider supporting local journalism and getting unlimited digital access witha Detroit Free Press subscription. We depend on readers like you. This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Elon Musk-Trump spat is a distraction from DOGE failures | Opinion
