logo
2025 Pride celebrations go ahead despite corporate exodus

2025 Pride celebrations go ahead despite corporate exodus

Yahoo13 hours ago

The architects of Pride celebrations across the United States met six-figure challenges this year, owing to a corporate exodus in the spring that diminished their sponsorship funds, which they said would jeopardize future programming. Organizers are contending with serious budget shortfalls as Pride Month begins, and several reported 20% to 30% less corporate support than in past years.
The show will go on this summer, they said, but what happens next is less certain.
"We're going to make it to the event," said Suzanne Ford, the executive director of San Francisco Pride, who told CBS News five corporate sponsors cut ties with the organization over the course of one overwhelming week in March and several others reduced their funding. "The real question now is, what kind of shape are we going to be in on the other side of Pride? Are we going to be able to keep the doors open?"
Corporate partners that backed out of San Francisco Pride this year were historically among its largest and most reliable donors, including Nissan Comcast/Xfinity and Bud Light's parent company, Anheuser-Busch. Along with Target, Bud Light has faced public backlash and boycotts over its Pride advertising in recent years.
"That hurt us greatly," Ford said of losing Anheuser-Busch, previously "one of the very largest" sponsors of San Francisco Pride. "Comcast and Nissan have been significant and have been longtime partners. They've been with us for a long time, so it was money that we've counted on."
Their retreats meant San Francisco Pride was operating at a loss of about $300,000, which Ford hopes will shrink to about $200,000 once increased donations are factored in from other sponsors, who raised their pledges to narrow the gaps left by the bigger brands. Two large corporate partners, Benefit Cosmetics and La Crema, initially dropped their sponsorship contracts but have since returned as partners, Ford said.
Several brands that stepped back from Pride partnerships in San Francisco have done the same in other cities. Anheuser-Busch, known for decades as a supporter of the LGBTQ community, also declined to sponsor the 2025 Pride Festival in its hometown of St. Louis, according to that event's organizers. The company had been one of their leading sponsors for the last 30 years, the organizer's said.
Pride Month was originally conceived as a way to commemorate the 1969 Stonewall riots, which are credited with kick-starting the modern gay rights movement, and it has evolved since then into a multifaceted celebration of the LGBTQ community. Local Pride plans typically involve multiday event rosters with at least one march, parade or festival, which are intermittently known to draw a million or more attendees.
Celebrations around Pride grew tremendously over the last decade or so, organizers say, in large part because of an influx of corporate sponsorships cropping up after the U.S. legalized marriage equality in 2015. The upward trend in brand support was so steep for a period of time that some sponsors were accused of exploiting LGBTQ issues for the purpose of turning a profit.
That trend looked very different this year, as corporate sponsors around the country either withdrew their support for Pride festivities or significantly scaled it back. Many attributed their decisions to financial strain or internal transitions, according to statements from several companies and organizers who recalled their conversations to CBS News.
"Nissan is currently reviewing all marketing and sales spending — including select consumer auto shows, sports properties and other entertainment activations — to maximize both efficiency and breakthrough effectiveness," a Nissan spokesperson said of the brand breaking partnerships with Pride organizers in San Francisco as well as New York City.
But organizers and supporters see a pattern in the sponsorship cancellations, which some consider implicit byproducts of the Trump administration's anti-DEI policies and ongoing attacks on transgender Americans. Ron de Harte, the co-president of the Board of Directors at USA Prides, a national network of Pride organizations, said the decline in national brand sponsorships for Pride events is widespread this year.
"This is happening with festival and event sponsorships across the board," said de Harte in a statement. "Of course, bad economic times are coupled with the current administration's unfriendly actions toward the LGBTQ communities, so some markets have sponsors who have moved on."
As the Capital Pride Alliance organized WorldPride this year in Washington, D.C., it grappled with a litany of complications leading up to this weekend's international gathering. After President Trump took over the Kennedy Center, multiple WorldPride events were either canceled or relocated under new leadership. In addition, the consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton, a major federal contractor, backed out of its 2025 WorldPride contract in a move that critics thought bent to government pressure.
A spokesperson for Capital Pride Alliance said Booz Allen was the only WorldPride sponsor that canceled a finalized contract, but others dropped out in various stages of the sponsorship process, including Comcast/Xfinity, Deloitte and Visa. The spokesperson said some brands became "silent partners," which means they donate in the background but avoid the publicity that can come with outright sponsorship.
Matt Cheng, the director of corporate sponsorships at Heritage of Pride, the nonprofit that produces New York City Pride events, told CBS News that its corporate partners gave various explanations for decreasing or eliminating support. Economic weariness was among them, he said, along with fear of retaliation.
"One of the big ones is the tariffs and economy. A lot of budgets have gotten slashed from a DEI and marketing perspective," he said. "But then the other one is fear of backlash from the federal government."
Heritage of Pride lost roughly one-quarter of its sponsorship dollars, or about $750,000, in the last few months. Large companies like Deutsche Bank ramped up their earlier donations to organizations because of the shortfall, and a poll of about 100 individual donors recently gave $10,000 or so, Cheng said. He hoped New York City Pride fundraisers would bring them closer to zero losses.
"In addition to reviewing our budget lines to make sure we can afford to put on Pride the way that it typically is put on, our other concern is our year-round programming," he said.
More immediately, a 25% budget gap would likely require Heritage of Pride to cut their only two grant programs, both of which support at-risk communities, Cheng added.
Like San Francisco, St. Louis and WorldPride in D.C., New York City Pride also lost large sponsors. Nissan and PepsiCo both pulled support from Heritage of Pride after previously being top donors, according to public partnership information released last year and Kevin Kilbride, the media and marketing manager at the nonprofit. Other sponsors have reduced their funding but are still planning to march in the upcoming Manhattan parade, Kilbride said.
Target has remained a silent partner of New York City Pride. Kilbride said Target continues to be "a valued partner" and its sponsorship this year was "at a level consistent with years' past."
"We are absolutely dedicated to fostering inclusivity for everyone — our team members, our guests, our supply partners, and the more than 2,000 communities we're proud to serve," a Target spokesperson said in a statement. "As we have for many years, we will continue to mark Pride Month by offering an assortment of celebratory products, hosting internal programming to support our incredible team and sponsoring local events in neighborhoods across the country."
CBS News contacted Anheuser-Busch, Booz Allen Hamilton, Comcast, Deloitte and PepsiCo but did not receive replies.
Musk alleges Trump's name appeared in Epstein files as feud escalates
What to know about President Trump's travel ban on nationals from 12 countries
Trump says he's disappointed by Musk criticism of budget bill, Musk says he got Trump elected

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

BarkBox employee compared Pride to MAGA in leaked memo. The CEO apologized.
BarkBox employee compared Pride to MAGA in leaked memo. The CEO apologized.

USA Today

time4 hours ago

  • USA Today

BarkBox employee compared Pride to MAGA in leaked memo. The CEO apologized.

BarkBox employee compared Pride to MAGA in leaked memo. The CEO apologized. "I do not agree with the content of the message," BarkBox founder and CEO Matt Meeker said. "It wasn't good, it doesn't reflect our values and I'm deeply sorry that it happened." Show Caption Hide Caption Organizers say political pressure is motivation to continue celebrating Pride Organizers say political pressure is motivation to continue organizing and celebrating Pride, although some corporate support dwindles. Less than a week into Pride Month, BarkBox is receiving backlash for a leaked memo that compares an LGBTQ+ themed pet collection to the Make America Great Again movement. Now the monthly dog subscription service's CEO is looking to make amends. The memo, shared to Reddit this week, informed a group of employees that the monthly dog subscription service would cease advertisements for its Pride collection, which includes several Pride and rainbow accessories. The memo was shared by one employee to a small group of others, BarkBox confirmed to USA TODAY. "While celebrating Pride is something we may value, we need to acknowledge that the current climate makes this promotion feel more like a political statement than a universally joyful moment for all dog people," the memo shared on Reddit reads. "If we wouldn't feel comfortable running a promotion centered around another politically charged symbol (like a MAGA-themed product), it's worth asking whether this is the right moment to run this particular campaign." BarkBox CEO: 'It wasn't good' In a social media statement shared on June 4, BarkBox founder and CEO Matt Meeker apologized for the leaked memo. "I do not agree with the content of the message," Meeker wrote. "It wasn't good, it doesn't reflect our values and I'm deeply sorry that it happened." As of June 6, BarkBox's Pride collection was promoted on the BarkBox website. Since the leaked memo, Meeker shared that 100% of the proceeds from the collection will be donated to the LGBTQ resource, Kaleidoscope Youth Center in Columbus, Ohio. DEI: What fueled the Target DEI boycott? The answer may surprise you Pride Month: What are the safest places for gay and trans people? See where your state ranks What else did the BarkBox memo say? "After some thoughtful discussion today with leadership, we've made the decision to pause all paid ads and lifecycle marketing pushes for the Pride kit effective immediately," the memo shared on Reddit begins. "This isn't about backing away from support − it's about tone and ensuring our marketing remains inclusive and welcoming to everyone in our community. Right now, pushing this promo risks unintentionally sending the message that 'we're not for you' to a large portion of our audience," the memo concludes. BarkBox did not confirm when the memo was sent, or by who. What is BarkBox's Pride collection? BarkBox's Pride collection features more than 25 LGBTQ+ themed toys, including a rainbow tug toy, "slay the drag queen" plush and "gaylien," an alien plushy with a T-shirt that reads, "Take me to your leather," a reference to the queer leather community. These items an be added to any BarkBox for an upcharge. A typical BarkBox, which is $24 a month, includes two toys and two treats each month. More Pride Month: Trump's actions on LGBTQ+ issues in Pride Month criticized as 'bullying' by advocates Memo leak follows other national brands moving away from DEI The memo follows a string of companies who have eradicated or pulled back on DEI − diversity, equity and inclusion − programs, including Target, Walmart, Amazon and McDonald's. The DEI rollbacks began after President Donald Trump took office. As soon as he could, the president issued executive orders to dismantle DEI by putting pressure on federal contractors to end "illegal DEI discrimination" and direct federal agencies to draw up lists of companies that should be investigated for their DEI policies. And while Trump has been successful in part during his first 100 days in office, there are still countless major companies publicly backing DEI, including Costco, American Express, Apple and Levi's. Contributing: Jessica Gunn, USA TODAY Greta Cross is a national trending reporter at USA TODAY. Story idea? Email her at gcross@

The 5 Worst Green Energy Projects Funded by Biden
The 5 Worst Green Energy Projects Funded by Biden

Yahoo

time5 hours ago

  • Yahoo

The 5 Worst Green Energy Projects Funded by Biden

Despite the Department of Government Efficiency's failures to cut spending and the president's support for a bill that will add $2.4 trillion to the federal deficit over the next 10 years, some wasteful government projects have been cut under the Trump administration. Energy Secretary Chris Wright recently canceled 24 grants approved by the Energy Department under former President Joe Biden. The action netted over $3 billion in savings. Earlier in May, Wright axed an additional $7 billion of green energy loans approved by Biden. Unfortunately for taxpayers, the savings that Wright has identified are only a drop in the bucket of the wasteful spending that the Biden Energy Department approved. Here are five of the most egregious examples: In December 2024, the Energy Department's Loan Programs Office (LPO) closed a $9.63 billion direct loan to BlueOval SK LLC, a joint venture between Ford and South Korean conglomerate SK On. The loan was approved to fund "the construction of three manufacturing plants, to produce batteries for Ford Motor Company's future Ford and Lincoln electric vehicles [E.V.s]," according to the award announcement. BlueOval has begun or completed construction for these facilities—one in western Tennessee called BlueOval City—and two in Hardin County, Kentucky, known as Kentucky 1 and 2. In addition to allocating millions of dollars in tax credits for the rights to house BlueOval City, the Tennessee Legislature also created the Megasite Authority of West Tennessee, reports Reason's Joe Lancaster. The board was granted the authority to execute contracts on behalf of development, which includes the power to seize private property through eminent domain. In most cases, the board lowballed local property owners, including Ray Jones, who was offered "a measly $8,165" for his acre of land, even though the going rate was $200,000 per acre. There is no set date for when the plant will open. Kentucky 1 has faced numerous occupational safety and health complaints from its workers. A review from The Courier-Journal found "dozens of workplace injuries; hospitalizations related to respiratory issues; unshakeable mold contamination; a bat-infested training facility; blocked emergency exit doors; and chemical exposure risks." The state has opened investigations into the plant, which is scheduled to begin production later this year. Kentucky 2's opening has been indefinitely delayed. Michael Adams, CEO of BlueOval SK, recently told WDRB, that the plant's opening date will be a market decision, but "the market is telling us that Kentucky 2 is not ready." The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed in 2021 created a new office within the Energy Department called the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED), whose goal is to finance first-of-a-kind clean energy projects through private-public partnerships. One of the largest beneficiaries of the program has been Exxon Mobil. The oil major was awarded a $332 million grant from OCED to "enable the use of hydrogen in place of natural gas" at a textile and plastics facility in Baytown, Texas. At the time of the announcement, the Biden administration said the project would prevent 2.7 million metric tons of carbon emissions per year. While an interesting technology, the project did not need taxpayer support. In the same year that Exxon received this disbursement (2024), the company reported annual earnings of $33.7 billion. The project's funding was canceled on May 30 by Wright. No industry was spared from corporate welfare under the Biden administration, including condiments. In October 2024, Kraft Heinz was awarded a grant of up to $170.9 million from OCED. The award was intended to fund energy efficiency upgrades, the installation of heat pumps and electric boilers, and renewable energy technologies at 10 of the company's facilities. The grant was also rescinded on May 30. Kraft Heinz says it will continue to invest in upgrading 30 of its manufacturing facilities and will invest $3 billion over the next five years "to modernize" its domestic supply chain infrastructure. In October 2024, the LPO announced a $2.26 billion direct loan to Lithium Nevada Corp., a subsidiary of Lithium Americas Corp., to build facilities to produce lithium carbonate—a critical component of E.V. batteries. The facilities will be sited next to and get their lithium from Thacker Pass, a mine site in Nevada that is estimated to hold the largest lithium reserves in the world. The U.S. largely relies on imports to meet its lithium needs. These facilities could reduce this dependence, but that doesn't mean the loan isn't wasteful. The demand for lithium, and lithium-carbonate, is expected to significantly climb in the next few decades as the use of green technologies increases. In 2024 alone, demand for the metal grew by 30 percent. Lithium Americas expects the mine, which began construction in February, to generate $2.2 billion per year in annual earnings. Taxpayers don't need to spend billions of dollars to support a project that the market seems to think will be successful. One of the largest steel makers in the U.S. was another beneficiary of Biden-era federal funding. In 2024, Cleveland-Cliffs, which generated $19.2 billion in revenue that year, was awarded up to $575 million in grants (which are still active) from the Energy Department. One of these awards, worth up to $500 million, would implement hydrogen fuel into the steel making process and install two electric melting furnaces at the company's Middletown Works facility in Ohio. The project is expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the plant by 1 million tons per year and received a $9.5 million disbursement in September 2024. A second grant worth up to $75 million would electrify Cleveland-Cliffs' facility in Butler, Pennsylvania, which produces steel for transforms, motors, and generators. This project got a $19 million disbursement in August 2024. The company says these projects are expected to be live before 2030. While Wright has canceled some of the most wasteful projects approved under Biden, federal backing for favored energy projects isn't going to end under the Trump administration. The Washington Free Beacon reports that the Energy Department is considering financing a $44 billion pipeline in Alaska. The post The 5 Worst Green Energy Projects Funded by Biden appeared first on

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store