logo
Pride events face budget shortfalls as US corporations pull support ahead of summer festivities

Pride events face budget shortfalls as US corporations pull support ahead of summer festivities

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Many U.S. corporations this year stopped supporting Pride events that celebrate LGBTQ+ culture and rights, causing hundreds of thousands of dollars in budget shortfalls ahead of the summer festivities and raising questions about corporate America's commitment to the cause.
The moves come as President Donald Trump has shown antipathy for trans protections and has attempted to roll back some LGBTQ+ friendly federal policies. Experts also note that a growing slice of the public has grown tired of companies taking a stance on social and political issues.
San Francisco Pride, the nonprofit that produces one of the country's largest and best-known LGBTQ+ celebrations, is facing a $200,000 budget gap after corporate donors dropped out. In Kansas City, Missouri, KC Pride lost about $200,000 — roughly half its annual budget.
Heritage of Pride, the umbrella organization behind NYC Pride and other LGBTQ+ events in New York City, is fundraising to narrow a $750,000 budget gap after companies withdrew.
Meanwhile, Budweiser brewer Anheuser-Busch ended its sponsorship of PrideFest in St. Louis, Missouri, its home base, after 30 years, leaving organizers with a $150,000 budget shortfall.
In response, many Pride organizations have canceled some dance parties, reduced the number of stages, hired less pricey headliners and no longer give volunteers free food or T-shirts.
But the core celebrations will go on. In San Francisco, this year's Pride theme is 'Queer Joy is Resistance.' In New York, it's 'Rise Up: Pride in Protest,' and, in Boston, it's 'Here to Stay!'
'If you come to Pride this year, that's a revolutionary act,' said Suzanne Ford, executive director of San Francisco Pride. 'You are sending a message to those in Washington that, here in San Francisco, we still have the same values that we've always had — you can love who you love here. We're not going to retreat from that.'
Following media coverage of their retreat, some companies changed course but asked that their names not be affiliated with the events, the event organizers said.
Corporations rethink Prid
e sponsorships
San Francisco Pride earlier this year lost the support of five major corporate donors, including Comcast, Anheuser-Busch and Diageo, the beverage giant that makes Guinness beer and Smirnoff vodka.
'With everything we're facing from the Trump administration, to lose five of your partners within a couple of weeks, it felt like we were being abandoned,' Ford said.
After the withdrawals drew attention, some corporations said they would donate but only anonymously, Ford said, declining to identify those companies. As of this week, neither Comcast, Anheuser-Busch nor Diageo appeared on the organization's website as sponsors of the June 29 festivities. It was unclear if they donated.
Anheuser-Busch and Diageo didn't reply to emails from The Associated Press seeking comment. A spokesperson for Comcast also declined to comment but said some of its companies are sponsoring Silicon Valley Pride and Oakland Pride.
NYC Pride spokesperson Chris Piedmont said about 20% of its corporate sponsors either dropped their support or scaled back, including New York-based PepsiCo and Nissan.
Kyle Bazemore, Nissan North America's director of corporate communications, said the decision comes as the automaker reviews all of its marketing expenses to lower costs. PepsiCo did not return an email seeking comment.
Piedmont said NYC Pride has also received anonymous corporate funding and that he appreciates the unpublicized support.
'Writing a check to a nonprofit and supporting a nonprofit with no strings attached is stepping up to the plate,' Piedmont said.
Companies retreat from 'brand activism'
The shift reflects how corporations are adjusting to a changing cultural landscape that began during the pandemic and accelerated with Trump's second term, experts said.
'Companies are resourceful, they are clever at identifying trends and studying their environment and their customers' needs, but those needs change and corporations adjust,' said Amir Grinstein, a marketing professor at Northeastern University.
Corporations' presence in rainbow-filled Pride parades, concerts and dance parties became more ubiquitous after the landmark 2015 Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, as companies splashed their names on parade floats, rainbow flags and bright plastic bracelets.
So-called brand activism reached its peak between 2016 to 2022, a period of social upheaval around the pandemic, police brutality and transgender rights, Grinstein said.
But research has since found a growing number of American consumers don't want companies taking positions on such topics, said Barbara Kahn, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School.
'There have always been people who said, 'I don't want my toothpaste to have an opinion, I just want to use my toothpaste,' but the tide has shifted, and research shows there are more people that feel that way now,' Kahn said.
Pride organizers keep their distance from some corporations
Meanwhile, Republican-led states have been passing legislation to curtail diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and LGBTQ+ rights, especially the ability of transgender young people to participate in sports or receive gender-affirming care.
Trump signed executive orders on his first day in office that rolled back protections for transgender people and terminated federal DEI programs.
Some companies followed suit by eliminating their DEI goals, prompting Pride organizations to sever ties.
San Francisco's organizers cut ties with Meta after the parent company of Facebook and Instagram terminated its DEI goals and content moderation policies.
Twin Cities Pride ended its relationship with Target over the Minneapolis-based retailer's curtailing of its DEI initiatives following a backlash from conservatives and the White House. The company's retreat from DEI policies led to a counter-boycott by civil rights advocates.
Target announced in May that sales fell more than expected in the first quarter due to customer boycotts, tariffs and other economic factors. The company now offers only some Pride products at a few stores and online.
Still, Rick Gomez, Target's chief commercial officer, told reporters in May that it's important to celebrate Heritage Months, which highlight different groups from Latinos to Asian Americans to the LGBTQ+ community.
'They drive sales growth for us,' he said.
Asking the community for financial support
First-time donations from individuals, foundations and local businesses have increased following corporate America's retreat.
Monday Mornings
The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week.
In Minneapolis, a crowdfunding campaign by Twin Cities Pride to fill a $50,000 funding gap raised more than $89,000.
In San Francisco, two local foundations donated $55,000 combined.
'This isn't the first year that there's been an inflammatory climate around Pride,' said James Moran, a spokesperson for KC Pride, in Kansas City, Missouri. 'We know that our community is looking for spaces that are meant for us, where we can celebrate but also process what's going on and build our own support networks.'
___
Associated Press retail reporter Anne D'Innocenzio in New York City contributed.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Economic Watch: Doubled U.S. steel, aluminum tariffs spark criticism, trade war concerns across globe
Economic Watch: Doubled U.S. steel, aluminum tariffs spark criticism, trade war concerns across globe

Canada Standard

time28 minutes ago

  • Canada Standard

Economic Watch: Doubled U.S. steel, aluminum tariffs spark criticism, trade war concerns across globe

As the largest supplier of U.S. steel, Canada has called the additional levies "unlawful and unjustified," and vowed to fight. BEIJING, June 5 (Xinhua) -- Government leaders, businesspeople, and analysts have voiced concerns and criticisms over the recent U.S. tariff hikes on imported steel and aluminum, warning that the measures would not only harm the interests of U.S. trade partners, but also fuel a global trade war and deal a blow to the world economy. The United States started to raise tariffs on imported steel and aluminum from 25 percent to 50 percent starting from Wednesday, according to an executive order signed by U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday. The European Commission criticized the new U.S. tariff measures, warning that the move could prompt swift European retaliation. "The EU is prepared to impose countermeasures, including in response to the latest U.S. tariff increase," the commission's spokesperson said in an emailed statement. The U.S. action undermines the EU's ongoing efforts to reach a negotiated agreement with the United States, according to the statement. As the largest supplier of U.S. steel, Canada has called the additional levies "unlawful and unjustified," and vowed to fight. "Canada's new government is engaged in intensive and live negotiations to have these and other tariffs removed as part of a new economic and security partnership with the United States," the Prime Minister's office said in a statement Tuesday. "We are in intensive negotiations with the Americans, and, in parallel, preparing reprisals if those negotiations do not succeed," said Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney on Wednesday. Unifor, a Canadian general trade union, called on Carney to retaliate immediately and urged Canada to pause exports of critical minerals to the United States. Hundreds of Canadian steelworkers have lost their jobs since initial tariffs took effect, said Unifor, warning that layoffs in the auto and aerospace industries could also occur. "This isn't trade policy, it's a direct attack on Canadian industries and workers," said Marty Warren, United Steelworkers National Director for Canada, in a statement. Thousands of Canadian jobs are on the line, and Canada needs to respond immediately and decisively to defend workers, added Warren. Calling the impact of the initial 25 percent tariffs "devastating," after it resulted in job losses and a drop in shipments to the United States, Catherine Cobden, CEO of the Canadian Steel Producers Association, said a 50 percent tariff will lead to a "dramatic acceleration" of those trends. "At a 50 percent tariff, we basically consider the U.S. market closed -- completely closed, door slammed shut, if you will -- to Canadian steel," she said. "We can't ship at 50 percent. Perhaps we can stockpile for a few days, but obviously we can't keep producing if one of our major markets is shuttered." Gary Clyde Hufbauer, a non-resident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said: "With the 50 percent tariff, not only is American steel going to be less internationally competitive but so are the multitude of American industries that depend on steel as a necessary input." The new rate on imported steel will almost certainly enlarge the profits of domestic steel companies while U.S. manufacturers and American households will pay dearly for the bonanza to steel barons, wrote Hufbauer in an opinion piece on Monday. The tariffs make it more expensive for domestic auto manufacturers to produce here, and "it's an economically inconsistent, illiterate policy that seems to be hiding under the national security justifications," said Wayne Winegarden, a senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute. "They've never given any justification why 25 percent is the right number, let alone why 50 percent is," Winegarden was quoted by a report on According to Felix Tintelnot, a professor of economics at Duke University, no business leader should make massive upfront investments in heavy industry if they don't believe that the same policy will last for a few years. Jeremy Flack, CEO of Flack Global Metals, a U.S.-based steel trader and manufacturer, said the tariffs have led to a pause of orders and reduced demand for steel. "We are not getting any orders. Volumes starting from February have begun to decline," Flack said.

Clean energy project cancellations top $14 billion so far in 2025
Clean energy project cancellations top $14 billion so far in 2025

National Observer

time41 minutes ago

  • National Observer

Clean energy project cancellations top $14 billion so far in 2025

This story was originally published by Inside Climate News and appears here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration Businesses have cancelled or delayed more than $14 billion of investments in US clean energy projects so far this year, reflecting their uncertainty and pessimism over federal support amid President Donald Trump's climate policy retreat, industry analysts reported Thursday. The sector still is showing resilience—at least $4.2 billion in new renewable energy, grid, electric vehicle and battery projects were announced over the same time period, from January through April, according to the tracking report by the nonprofit group Environmental Entrepreneurs, or E2, and its research partner, Atlas Public Policy. Some 10,000 jobs are expected to be created by these newly announced projects—including an electric truck assembly plant that the Jeff Bezos-backed startup Slate Auto said it would site in Warsaw, Indiana. That's equal to the estimated number of job losses from all the clean energy projects that have been abandoned so far this year. Nevertheless, it's a sharp reversal of trends E2 tracked in the sector over the previous three years, when $127.7 billion in new clean energy project announcements outpaced cancellations at a rate of nearly 50-to-1. Officials at E2, a nonpartisan group of clean energy business leaders and investors, said it was an ominous sign as the Senate prepares to take up Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill,' the House-passed tax and spending cut package that would eliminate most of the clean energy tax credits Congress passed in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. 'If the tax plan passed by the House last week becomes law, expect to see construction and investments stopping in states across the country as more projects and jobs are cancelled,' said Michael Timberlake, communications director for E2. 'Businesses are now counting on Congress to come to its senses and stop this costly attack on an industry that is essential to meeting America's growing energy demand and that's driving unprecedented economic growth in every part of the country.' The White House did not immediately respond to questions about the report. The biggest of the cancellations that E2 tracked came in April. The United Auto Workers announced that Stellantis would not go forward with a $3.2 billion battery plant it planned to add to a giant shuttered assembly facility it is reopening in Belvidere, Illinois. And global energy giant RWE announced it was shuttering its US offshore wind operations 'for the time being' due to 'the political environment' in the United States. RWE had invested $1.1 billion to develop wind projects offshore of New York, Louisiana and California. While E2 tracks public announcements of new projects and cancellations, other efforts at tracking what's happening in the clean energy sector provide a more detailed picture—and in some senses, a more optimistic one. The Clean Investment Monitor, a project of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the consulting firm Rhodium Group, tracks actual capital spending in the quarter of all projects that have broken ground, and also includes investment in decarbonization projects at energy and industrial plants as well as consumer spending—for example, on EVs, rooftop solar and efficiency upgrades. For the first quarter of 2025, Clean Investment Monitor reported $67.3 billion in spending, a 6.9 percent increase from the same period in 2024. However, it was a 3.8 percent falloff from the previous quarter, and the second consecutive quarterly decline after an unbroken record of quarterly expansion that began in 2021. Retail purchases of clean energy technology by households and businesses clearly were the driving force in investment in early 2025, the Clean Investment Monitor reported. Its analysis, like that of E2, noted the cancellation of a number of big clean energy projects over the quarter. And it warned of the headwinds for the clean energy supply chain, not only due to uncertain federal policy but the escalation of tariffs and broader macroeconomic pressures. The American Clean Power Association (ACPA), which tracks utility-scale electricity projects, also put out its first quarter report Thursday, showing that developers installed 7.4 gigawatts of solar, wind and storage capacity, marking the second-strongest start to a year on record. (The strongest start on record was 2024, when 8 gigawatts came on line.) That brings total utility-scale clean power capacity to more than 320 gigawatts, which the association estimates is enough to power nearly 80 million US homes. Of course, that electricity is not only powering homes but also businesses, where power demand is rising sharply due to data centers. It was a record-setting quarter for battery storage capacity, which surpassed 30 gigawatts, a 65 percent increase from last year. Indiana quadrupled its energy storage capacity in just one quarter, with the help of a big system owned by the energy company AES that opened in April at the site of a former coal power plant. Texas continued to lead the nation in both utility-scale solar and land-based wind capacity, with its total clean energy portfolio reaching more than 80 gigawatts, a 20 percent increase from a year ago, ACPA said. In all, eight of the top 10 states for clean power additions in the quarter voted Republican in the 2024 presidential election. The association also saw continuing growth in the project development pipeline, with a 12 percent year-over-year increase in projects under construction or in the advanced stages of development. If all are built, it would add up to $328 billion in investment, said the group's CEO, Jason Grumet. 'Clean power is shovel-ready at scale,' he said, while echoing E2's concerns about the retreat from federal support for the sector in Washington. 'With unprecedented demand growth for electricity, we must send consistent investment signals across the energy sector,' Grumet said. 'The greatest threat to a reliable energy system is an unreliable political system.'

Ford government to open public clean energy fund to support nuclear power
Ford government to open public clean energy fund to support nuclear power

National Observer

time41 minutes ago

  • National Observer

Ford government to open public clean energy fund to support nuclear power

The Ford government introduced legislation Tuesday that would open Ontario's public clean energy fund to support nuclear power — a move critics say redirects resources away from faster, cheaper renewable options such as wind and solar. The Protect Ontario by Securing Affordable Energy for Generations Act proposes expanding eligibility for the Future Clean Electricity Fund (FCEF) to include nuclear generation and transmission infrastructure. The fund was originally created to support the development of new non-fossil fuel electricity projects in Ontario, using proceeds from the sale of clean energy credits. These credits are generated by wind, solar, hydro, bioenergy and nuclear facilities and sold to businesses seeking to meet corporate sustainability targets. Revenue from those sales flows into the FCEF to help fund future clean energy projects. Until now, the fund has focused on renewable energy. But under the new legislation, the government plans to expand its eligibility to include nuclear generation and transmission infrastructure — a shift the province says is necessary to meet soaring electricity demand. Ontario's Minister of Energy and Mines, Stephen Lecce, said the legislation aims to address rising demand and economic uncertainty by prioritizing local investment and job creation amid global competition and trade tensions with the US. 'As global competition intensifies, energy demand surges, and affordability becomes more important than ever, Ontario isn't standing still — we're stepping up,' Lecce said. The province expects electricity demand to rise 75 per cent by 2050. Critics argue the province is backing the wrong solution, pointing to nuclear projects as expensive and much slower to complete. The Ford government introduced legislation Tuesday that would open Ontario's public clean energy fund to support nuclear power — a move critics say redirects resources away from faster, cheaper renewable options such as wind and solar. 'The Ford government's nuclear plans do not make sense since they will raise our electricity rates and make our industries less competitive,' said Jack Gibbons, chair of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance. 'Unfortunately, the Ford government continues to prioritize fossil fuels and nuclear energy. Their decisions don't make sense for consumers, the climate or national security.' In recent months, the Ford government has announced billions in investment for new nuclear power generation and refurbishing existing plants. The province says these investments will create tens of thousands of jobs in the sector. Early this year, the government announced plans for a 21st-century nuclear megaproject at Port Hope, aiming to establish Ontario as North America's nuclear powerhouse. Described as one of the largest nuclear plants in the world, the project is expected to generate up to 10,000 megawatts of electricity — enough to power 10 million homes. However, the government has yet to disclose the total cost or timeline. But a new report released Wednesday by the Ontario Clean Air Alliance suggests wind and solar could meet the same energy needs much sooner and at a much lower cost — potentially saving Ontario up to $19 billion annually in electricity costs. The report also highlights Ontario's potential for offshore wind development in the Great Lakes and large-scale solar at the Port Hope site. It argues that renewables, paired with energy storage and stronger grid connections with provinces like Quebec, would offer cleaner, faster and cheaper solutions than building a massive nuclear plant that may not be ready until 2045. Gibbons warned that expanding nuclear power would deepen Ontario's reliance on US nuclear technology and enriched uranium fuel, exposing the province to geopolitical risks at a time when trade tensions with the US are escalating.

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