Latest news with #HumanRightsCampaign
USA Today
a day ago
- Politics
- USA Today
Pride 2025: Why we don't have a month dedicated to 'straight pride'
Pride 2025: Why we don't have a month dedicated to 'straight pride' Show Caption Hide Caption Pride flag colors, explained: Meanings behind the rainbow colors The rainbow Pride flag has become a symbol for the LGBTQ+ community. Here's how the flag came to be and what its colors represent. For the second year in a row, a bar in Ohio is offering deals for "Heterosexual Awesomeness Month," and lawmakers from the state have proposed a "natural family month" that explicitly excludes LGBTQ+ families and celebrates only families led by straight men with children. Utah passed a bill to become the first state to ban Pride flags from flying on any government property, though Nazi flags were allowed, and Idaho passed a similar one. More than 500 bills targeting the LGBTQ+ community have been proposed in 2025 alone, about 2 in 5 corporations are decreasing recognition of Pride Month out of fear of retaliation from the Trump administration and hate crimes against the LGBTQ+ community, especially transgender people, are on the rise. In 2023, the Human Rights Campaign declared a National State of Emergency for LGBTQ+ Americans for the first time in its over 40-year history and the FBI reported its highest number of gender identity-based hate crimes to date. Several countries have begun warning their LGBTQ+ citizens about traveling to America and in March, the U.S. was added to the Global Human Rights Watchlist due to declining civil liberties, in part because of the treatment of the LGBTQ+ community. Still, more conservative groups are pushing for a "straight pride" month as an answer to the traditional celebration of Pride Month. The LGBTQ+ community celebrates Pride Month during June to commemorate the Stonewall uprising. But amidst a political and social environment that has become increasingly hostile towards queer people, events and promotions celebrating heterosexuality seem to push back on the celebration. Heterosexuality is the norm, and experts say that creates the need to dedicate a month to LGBTQ+ visibility. Here is more about why America celebrates Pride as a month and why there isn't a month to celebrate straight people. Why don't we have a month dedicated to straight people? Imara Jones, a journalist and founder of non-profit news organization TransLash Media, said we have dedicated months, including Pride, Black History Month and others, because those communities have been historically marginalized. "People have been systemically written out of history and excluded and made invisible," she said. "One of the antidotes to that has been the idea that we will make people more visible and that there needs to be increased visibility in order to counteract that." She also pointed out that the majority of people in the U.S. identify as heterosexual. According to December 2023 data from the UCLA Williams Institute, 5.5% of adults, or 13.9 million people, in the U.S. identify as LGBT. The norms of heterosexuality are widely reflected in mainstream media, she said, mentioning shows like "Bridgerton" and "The Bachelor." She said Pride is about declaring, "This is who I am." Pride Month commemorates Stonewall riots, celebrates community Pride Month commemorates the 1969 Stonewall Uprising in New York and celebrates the LGBTQ+ community and the fight for equal rights. The Stonewall Uprising began on June 28, 1969, when police raided the Stonewall Inn, a prominent gay bar in Manhattan's Greenwich Village. The protests that followed are credited with a shift in LGBTQ+ activism in the U.S. The following year saw some of the first Pride parades in Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles and New York. Despite the pivotal role transgender people and women of color played in the riots, including trans activist Marsha P. Johnson, they were largely excluded from early Pride celebrations. Today, Pride Month presents an opportunity for visibility and community. In addition to celebrating LGBTQ+ love and joy, it's also a time to highlight important policy and resource issues the community faces. Anti-LGBTQ+ hate, legislation on the rise The last few years have seen waves of legislation targeting the LGBTQ+ community. In 2024, more than 500 bills were introduced in state legislatures and 49 of those were signed into law, according to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). This year, at least 588 anti-LGBTQ+ bills have been introduced and 57 have been signed into law as of May 30. In 2024, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) saw a 13% increase in the number of anti-LGBTQ+ groups from the previous year and in 2023, it identified an approximately 30% increase in anti-LGBTQ+ hate groups, more than they had ever listed. FBI crime data from 2022 and 2023 showed that anti-LGBTQ+ hate crimes were also on the rise, with 2023 data showing that 2,800 incidents reported by the FBI were classified as bias against the victims' sexual orientation or gender identity, accounting for nearly one in four (22.8%) of total hate crimes committed that year. In 2022, the Human Rights Campaign "sounded the alarm" when FBI data showed a 13.8% increase in reports based on sexual orientation and a 32.9% jump in reported hate crimes based on gender identity. And in 2024, GLAAD documented 110 anti-LGBTQ+ incidents in June 2024 alone, while the SPLC recorded at least 74 bomb threats targeting LGBTQ people and events in the same month. Anti-trans bills have specifically been on the rise as the Trump administration has relied on that small population as a major scapegoat in his presidential campaign and, said SPLC, with Texas alone having filed 32 anti-trans bills for the 2025 legislative session. Jones said the political pushback against diversity, equity and inclusion trickles down into Pride celebrations. She has seen intense anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric online seep into real life with real consequences for the community. "We can't ignore... the role of intimidation in all of this, to be quite frank about it," she said. Contributing: Ahjané Forbes, USA TODAY
Miami Herald
2 days ago
- Business
- Miami Herald
Target faces another massive boycott from customers
Target (TGT) has had a rough year, and it's about to get a bit more challenging. The retail giant has suffered backlash from consumers, especially over the past few months, shortly after it decided to scale back its diversity, equity, and inclusion policies in January. This involved withdrawing its participation in the Human Rights Campaign survey, which tracks LGBTQ+ corporate policies and practices. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter It also discontinued its three-year DEI goals and Racial Equity Action and Change initiatives, which involved advancing the careers of Black employees, instituting anti-racism training for team members, promoting Black-owned businesses, and sourcing products from Black suppliers. Related: Target CEO sounds alarm on customer behavior This decision had a major domino effect, sparking several boycotts from consumers who were frustrated with the change. Amid these boycotts, the foot traffic in Target's stores dropped. According to recent data from the number of customers visiting Target stores started to decline during the week of Jan. 27, and the trend continued over the next two months. In February, Target's foot traffic dipped by 9% year-over-year. March showed a slight improvement, but it still declined by 6.50%, compared to the same month last year. Target even revealed in its first-quarter earnings report for 2025 that its sales recently took a hit. Its comparable store sales decreased by 3.8% year-over-year. Specifically, the number of transactions in stores dipped by 2.4%, while the average amount of money customers spent per transaction declined by roughly 1.4%. Image source:Amid decreased sales, Target is now set to face another major boycott from customers, which threatens to exacerbate the retailer's recent woes. The People's Union USA, which organized boycotts of Amazon and Walmart earlier this year, has called for a Target boycott, which will begin on June 3 and end on June 9. In a recent video posted on Instagram, The People's Union USA founder John Schwarz said that despite already being boycotted for recent DEI cuts, Target has "had their chance," and "they're not doing anything" to respond to consumers' recent frustrations. "So, what we are doing between June 3 and June 9, that week, we will be calling for the permanent boycott of Target," said Schwarz. "Shop anywhere else but Target, and I literally mean that if you've got to shop at Walmart or Amazon, places we boycott, instead of Target, do it. Target needs to be shut down, this corporation needs to feel the full power of the people." Related: Target CEO admits a major mistake amid boycotts from customers The People's Union USA has been organizing "economic blackouts" of large corporations since February. So far, it has organized specific boycotts aimed at Amazon, Walmart, and General Mills. After its Target boycott concludes, McDonald's is next on its list. The group aims to "expose corruption and exploitation" and "hold corporations accountable" through these boycotts. "We're building a people-powered force that's not just pushing back, but preparing to take power back from the corporations, the billionaire class, and the political parasites that have been feeding off our work, our wages, and our rights for far too long," said The People's Union USA on its website. The boycott comes after Target CEO Brian Cornell has made bold moves to address outrage over the company's recent DEI cuts. In April, after the Rev. Al Sharpton threatened to organize a Target boycott over its changes to DEI, Cornell agreed to meet with Sharpton to discuss the company's decision. After the meeting, Sharpton posted a statement on social media platform X, claiming that his conversation with Cornell was "candid" and "constructive." More Retail: Costco quietly plans to offer a convenient service for customersT-Mobile pulls the plug on generous offer, angering customersKellogg sounds alarm on unexpected shift in customer behavior In May, Cornell also reportedly sent an email to Target employees acknowledging that it has been "a tough few months," and admitted that the company's lack of communication amid recent controversy has led to "uncertainty," according to a report from The Minnesota Star Tribune. "I recognize that silence from us has created uncertainty, so I want to be very clear: We are still the Target you know and believe in," said Cornell in the email. He also emphasized that Target's values of "inclusivity, connection, drive" are "not up for debate" and said that the company is "committed" to sharing how its values create an impact. "The world around us is noisier and more complicated, but that doesn't change who we are," said Cornell. Related: Veteran fund manager unveils eye-popping S&P 500 forecast The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
‘These colors don't run': HRC launches Pride Month with message of resilience and resistance
With Pride Month set to begin, Human Rights Campaign national press secretary Brandon Wolf joins Way Too Early to unveil this year's theme: 'These colors don't run.' Wolf highlights the record 3.6 million supporters now backing the HRC, and explains why Pride 2025 will be both a celebration and a protest amid rising government attacks on the LGBTQ+ community.
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Hiltzik: Target learns that bowing to anti-DEI backers can be costly, a lesson for those bowing to Trump
Has any American company run away from a public commitment faster than Target? In an Aug. 19, 2020, conference call, Target Chief Executive Brian Cornell forthrightly put his company in the forefront of the quest for racial and ethnic justice. George Floyd had been murdered by Police Officer Derek Chauvin, abetted by several other officers in Minneapolis, Target's home city, only about three months earlier. Calls for recognition of the racism exposed by the killing were still reverberating nationwide. "Our team is passionately demanding equity and justice for our Black colleagues and guests," Cornell said. "We are united in that passion and committed ... to playing an active role in addressing the persistent racial injustices that have sparked protests around the world." If the founding history of this country is any guide, those who stood up in court to vindicate constitutional rights and, by so doing, served to promote the rule of law, will be the models lauded when this period of American history is written. Federal Judge Beryl Howell He said Target would put its influence to work "to determine actions and resources that will move us towards a more inclusive, equitable and just society." The company ultimately committed to increase the racial diversity of its workforce and to spend billions of dollars with Black-owned suppliers. How times change. This January, Target backed down. On Jan. 24 — just four days after President Trump launched his second term with a flurry of antidiversity executive orders — Target announced it was "concluding our three-year diversity, equity and inclusion goals" and its "Racial Equity Action and Change initiatives." (REACH was an initiative Cornell had announced in that 2020 call.) The company also said it was withdrawing from "all external diversity-focused surveys," including a widely followed Corporate Equality index sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign, which tracks corporate policies on LGBTQ+ rights and inclusion. And it said it was "evolving" its "supplier diversity team to "supplier engagement." Target may have thought it was tacking toward consumer preferences, or that DEI was a craze that had faded out. Read more: Hiltzik: Columbia University's capitulation to Trump puts academic freedom at risk coast to coast But here's the punch line: Target's sales have cratered, at least in part because consumers were angry about its reversals. The company's management has been a little vague about the impact of all this. At a May 21 conference call with Wall Street analysts following its release of earnings for the first quarter ended March 31, Cornell alluded to the backlash without going into detail. He attributed the company's ugly performance — comparable-store sales down by 5.7% from a year earlier — to several factors, including "the reaction to the updates we shared ... in January." That was an obvious allusion to the dropping of DEI initiatives. But Cornell said "we can't reliably estimate the impact of each [factor] separately." It's true that Target, like other big retailers, has had disappointing sales recently. In the last quarter, most have attributed any sales slump to consumer uncertainty about Trump's confusing tariff pronouncements. But the fact that Cornell felt obligated to mention the consumer reaction to Target's altered diversity policies is notable, and appears to be unique in the retail industry. I asked Target for further comment on the issue but received no reply. But since Target had given its commitment to diversity a central role in its corporate persona, it's proper to take a closer look — not only at the company's experience, but also the course of corporate antidiscrimination policies more generally. It's also worth noting that Target isn't the first institution to discover that abandoning principle isn't a sure path to material success or public esteem. That's been the experience of big law firms and major universities that kowtowed to Trump in his anti-DEI drive this year. Several major firms that were threatened with or hit with White House sanctions made deals with Trump that included confessing to misbehavior that may not even have occurred and committing to hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of pro bono work that may be dictated by Trump — a departure from pro bono tradition, which typically means providing underserved groups or individuals with free legal representation. Read more: Hiltzik: Business leaders bow to anti-DEI activists — except at Costco The firms may have thought that meeting Trump's terms would be the best way to keep clients who might have been rattled by Trump's attacks on their lawyers. As it happens, some clients have fled anyway, possibly concluding that big firms that won't fight Trump might not defend them aggressively against other adversaries. Some also have lost lawyers, dismayed by the pusillanimous behavior of their leaders. It turns out that law firms that have steadfastly rejected Trump's threats have been winning in their lawsuits against the White House's allegedly illegal and unconstitutional threats and sanctions. Federal judges have granted the firms Jenner & Block, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey temporary restraining orders against Trump's sanctions. Federal Judge Beryl Howell of Washington, D.C., ruled Trump's executive order targeting the firm Perkins Coie unconstitutional and granted the firm summary judgment against the government. Howell went further, taking a swipe at the firms that had capitulated to Trump. "If the founding history of this country is any guide," she wrote, "those who stood up in court to vindicate constitutional rights and, by so doing, served to promote the rule of law, will be the models lauded when this period of American history is written." Universities such as Columbia are also discovering that the Trump administration has trouble taking "yes" for an answer. Columbia publicly bent its knee to Trump in March, but that didn't save it from being hit with more sanctions from the White House last week over its supposed violations of civil rights law through purported "deliberate indifference" toward harassment of Jewish students. That brings us to the capitulation of American corporations to the partisan, ideological assault on diversity, equity and inclusion, and specifically to the fix Target is in. Read more: Hiltzik: Right-wing culture warriors say wokeness is dead. They can't even define it I've written before about how corporate America is a thin reed to lean on as a counterforce to assaults from the political right wing on voting rights, women's access to reproductive healthcare and democracy itself. Many companies that once expressed a commitment to end or at least review their contributions to the 147 Republicans who voted against certifying the 2020 election soon resumed their contributions. Some made similar promises to oppose state laws restricting abortion or voting rights, or talked openly about reducing their activities in states enacting such measures. For the most part, these pledges have been all talk, no action. When Republicans campaigned against "woke" policies or DEI — an abbreviation that had the virtue for the GOP of being vague enough to serve as an all-purpose slogan for conservatives — Walmart, Ford, Anheuser-Busch and John Deere, among other companies, rolled back their initiatives. One of the exceptions to take a strong stand on behalf of DEI is Costco Wholesale. In a response to a shareholder resolution proposed by the right-wing National Center for Public Policy Research insinuating that Costco's DEI program 'holds litigation, reputational and financial risks to the Company,' Costco management reiterated its commitment to DEI. 'Our efforts at diversity, equity and inclusion remind and reinforce with everyone at our Company the importance of creating opportunities for all. We believe that these efforts enhance our capacity to attract and retain employees who will help our business succeed.' The anti-DEI resolution was rejected by 98% of shareholders voting. Target seemed well placed to be another exception. It's one of America's biggest retailers, with more than $100 billion in annual sales. Early in 2023, Cornell boasted that 'our long-standing commitment to diversity, and equity, and inclusion ... has fueled much of our growth over the last nine years.' In 2022, in fact, Target published a scorecard of its DEI progress—a 33% increase in corporate officers of color, 62% increase in promotions for people of color, spending of $1.78 billion with "diverse suppliers," and so on. "We are never done," it pledged. About two weeks after Cornell's 2023 boast, the company capitulated to what I labeled a "braying mob of anti-LGBTQ+ reactionaries" that had targeted Target during Pride Month, a celebration of LGBTQ+ communities every June. Read more: Hiltzik: Right-wing hatemongers count on the cowardice of companies such as Target Even though the company's stores had featured Pride-related merchandise for years, in 2023 it told personnel in many stores to reduce or even eliminate their Pride-themed displays or move the merchandise to less conspicuous sections of the stores. Some LGBTQ+ designers reported that their products have been taken off the shelves. This year's retreat from DEI policies is merely a continuation of that craven approach. It has supplanted its straightforward commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion, as Cornell expressed it in 2020, with a steamy helping of corporate-speak mush. "Belonging for all is an essential part of our team and culture, helping fuel consumer relevance and business results," the company said in a publicly issued "fact sheet" in January. "We aim to create joyful experiences through an assortment of products and services that help all guests feel seen and celebrated, increasing relevance with consumers... . We build deep and lasting relationships with the communities we serve, driving impact, economic vitality and connection that fuels loyalty." The communities most affected by the pullback didn't buy into these vague promises. Black pastors and others launched boycotts of the company; judging from Cornell's pained observation to the Wall Street analysts last week, the boycotts may have had an effect. Whether Target continues to see a slide in sales because of customer discontent isn't clear at this moment, and it's certainly possible that consumer concerns about Trump's tariffs and their consequent upward pressure on prices will wreak the most damage. But this is a lesson on the shallowness of corporate character. Trump, it has become evident, is himself all talk, no action. He doesn't have the legal power to end DEI initiatives at private businesses, and the cadre of followers who respond to his culture warfare may be nowhere as large as they think they are. But that only makes the faintheartedness of corporate America all the more dispiriting. Get the latest from Michael HiltzikCommentary on economics and more from a Pulitzer Prize me up. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
6 days ago
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
Target learns that bowing to anti-DEI backers can be costly, a lesson for those bowing to Trump
Has any American company run away from a public commitment faster than Target? In an Aug. 19, 2020, conference call, Target Chief Executive Brian Cornell forthrightly put his company in the forefront of the quest for racial and ethnic justice. George Floyd had been murdered by Police Officer Derek Chauvin, abetted by several other officers in Minneapolis, Target's home city, only about three months earlier. Calls for recognition of the racism exposed by the killing were still reverberating nationwide. 'Our team is passionately demanding equity and justice for our Black colleagues and guests,' Cornell said. 'We are united in that passion and committed ... to playing an active role in addressing the persistent racial injustices that have sparked protests around the world.' He said Target would put its influence to work 'to determine actions and resources that will move us towards a more inclusive, equitable and just society.' The company ultimately committed to increase the racial diversity of its workforce and to spend billions of dollars with Black-owned suppliers. How times change. This January, Target backed down. On Jan. 24 — just four days after President Trump launched his second term with a flurry of antidiversity executive orders — Target announced it was 'concluding our three-year diversity, equity and inclusion goals' and its 'Racial Equity Action and Change initiatives.' (REACH was an initiative Cornell had announced in that 2020 call.) The company also said it was withdrawing from 'all external diversity-focused surveys,' including a widely followed Corporate Equality index sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign, which tracks corporate policies on LGBTQ+ rights and inclusion. And it said it was 'evolving' its 'supplier diversity team to 'supplier engagement.' Target may have thought it was tacking toward consumer preferences, or that DEI was a craze that had faded out. But here's the punch line: Target's sales have cratered, at least in part because consumers were angry about its reversals. The company's management has been a little vague about the impact of all this. At a May 21 conference call with Wall Street analysts following its release of earnings for the first quarter ended March 31, Cornell alluded to the backlash without going into detail. He attributed the company's ugly performance — comparable-store sales down by 5.7% from a year earlier — to several factors, including 'the reaction to the updates we shared ... in January.' That was an obvious allusion to the dropping of DEI initiatives. But Cornell said 'we can't reliably estimate the impact of each [factor] separately.' It's true that Target, like other big retailers, has had disappointing sales recently. In the last quarter, most have attributed any sales slump to consumer uncertainty about Trump's confusing tariff pronouncements. But the fact that Cornell felt obligated to mention the consumer reaction to Target's altered diversity policies is notable, and appears to be unique in the retail industry. I asked Target for further comment on the issue but received no reply. But since Target had given its commitment to diversity a central role in its corporate persona, it's proper to take a closer look — not only at the company's experience, but also the course of corporate antidiscrimination policies more generally. It's also worth noting that Target isn't the first institution to discover that abandoning principle isn't a sure path to material success or public esteem. That's been the experience of big law firms and major universities that kowtowed to Trump in his anti-DEI drive this year. Several major firms that were threatened with or hit with White House sanctions made deals with Trump that included confessing to misbehavior that may not even have occurred and committing to hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of pro bono work that may be dictated by Trump — a departure from pro bono tradition, which typically means providing underserved groups or individuals with free legal representation. The firms may have thought that meeting Trump's terms would be the best way to keep clients who might have been rattled by Trump's attacks on their lawyers. As it happens, some clients have fled anyway, possibly concluding that big firms that won't fight Trump might not defend them aggressively against other adversaries. Some also have lost lawyers, dismayed by the pusillanimous behavior of their leaders. It turns out that law firms that have steadfastly rejected Trump's threats have been winning in their lawsuits against the White House's allegedly illegal and unconstitutional threats and sanctions. Federal judges have granted the firms Jenner & Block, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey temporary restraining orders against Trump's sanctions. Federal Judge Beryl Howell of Washington, D.C., ruled Trump's executive order targeting the firm Perkins Coie unconstitutional and granted the firm summary judgment against the government. Howell went further, taking a swipe at the firms that had capitulated to Trump. 'If the founding history of this country is any guide,' she wrote, 'those who stood up in court to vindicate constitutional rights and, by so doing, served to promote the rule of law, will be the models lauded when this period of American history is written.' Universities such as Columbia are also discovering that the Trump administration has trouble taking 'yes' for an answer. Columbia publicly bent its knee to Trump in March, but that didn't save it from being hit with more sanctions from the White House last week over its supposed violations of civil rights law through purported 'deliberate indifference' toward harassment of Jewish students. That brings us to the capitulation of American corporations to the partisan, ideological assault on diversity, equity and inclusion, and specifically to the fix Target is in. I've written before about how corporate America is a thin reed to lean on as a counterforce to assaults from the political right wing on voting rights, women's access to reproductive healthcare and democracy itself. Many companies that once expressed a commitment to end or at least review their contributions to the 147 Republicans who voted against certifying the 2020 election soon resumed their contributions. Some made similar promises to oppose state laws restricting abortion or voting rights, or talked openly about reducing their activities in states enacting such measures. For the most part, these pledges have been all talk, no action. When Republicans campaigned against 'woke' policies or DEI — an abbreviation that had the virtue for the GOP of being vague enough to serve as an all-purpose slogan for conservatives — Walmart, Ford, Anheuser-Busch and John Deere, among other companies, rolled back their initiatives. One of the exceptions to take a strong stand on behalf of DEI is Costco Wholesale. In a response to a shareholder resolution proposed by the right-wing National Center for Public Policy Research insinuating that Costco's DEI program 'holds litigation, reputational and financial risks to the Company,' Costco management reiterated its commitment to DEI. 'Our efforts at diversity, equity and inclusion remind and reinforce with everyone at our Company the importance of creating opportunities for all. We believe that these efforts enhance our capacity to attract and retain employees who will help our business succeed.' The anti-DEI resolution was rejected by 98% of shareholders voting. Target seemed well placed to be another exception. It's one of America's biggest retailers, with more than $100 billion in annual sales. Early in 2023, Cornell boasted that 'our long-standing commitment to diversity, and equity, and inclusion ... has fueled much of our growth over the last nine years.' In 2022, in fact, Target published a scorecard of its DEI progress—a 33% increase in corporate officers of color, 62% increase in promotions for people of color, spending of $1.78 billion with 'diverse suppliers,' and so on. 'We are never done,' it pledged. About two weeks after Cornell's 2023 boast, the company capitulated to what I labeled a 'braying mob of anti-LGBTQ+ reactionaries' that had targeted Target during Pride Month, a celebration of LGBTQ+ communities every June. Even though the company's stores had featured Pride-related merchandise for years, in 2023 it told personnel in many stores to reduce or even eliminate their Pride-themed displays or move the merchandise to less conspicuous sections of the stores. Some LGBTQ+ designers reported that their products have been taken off the shelves. This year's retreat from DEI policies is merely a continuation of that craven approach. It has supplanted its straightforward commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion, as Cornell expressed it in 2020, with a steamy helping of corporate-speak mush. 'Belonging for all is an essential part of our team and culture, helping fuel consumer relevance and business results,' the company said in a publicly issued 'fact sheet' in January. 'We aim to create joyful experiences through an assortment of products and services that help all guests feel seen and celebrated, increasing relevance with consumers... . We build deep and lasting relationships with the communities we serve, driving impact, economic vitality and connection that fuels loyalty.' The communities most affected by the pullback didn't buy into these vague promises. Black pastors and others launched boycotts of the company; judging from Cornell's pained observation to the Wall Street analysts last week, the boycotts may have had an effect. Whether Target continues to see a slide in sales because of customer discontent isn't clear at this moment, and it's certainly possible that consumer concerns about Trump's tariffs and their consequent upward pressure on prices will wreak the most damage. But this is a lesson on the shallowness of corporate character. Trump, it has become evident, is himself all talk, no action. He doesn't have the legal power to end DEI initiatives at private businesses, and the cadre of followers who respond to his culture warfare may be nowhere as large as they think they are. But that only makes the faintheartedness of corporate America all the more dispiriting.
