Friday’s ‘economic blackout’ boycott is missing a key ingredient: Expert

Simone Del Rosario:

A grassroots movement is calling on Americans not to spend a single dime on Friday.

John Schwarz:

“February 28, the 24-hour economic blackout: no Amazon, no Walmart, no fast food, no gas, not a single unnecessary dollar spent … for one day, we are going to finally turn the tables.”

Simone Del Rosario:

John Schwarz is behind the latest economic boycott and founded The People’s Union USA. The organization claims to be “a movement of people, unionizing to take back control of our economy, government and future of our country.”

The website says Friday’s economic blackout is its first action. As of Thursday morning, Schwarz and The People’s Union raised more than $70,000 on a GoFundMe.

The People’s Union claims the 24-hour boycott will “show [retailers] who really holds the power.”

John Schwarz:

“For our entire lives, they have told us we have no choice … that we have to accept these insane prices, the corporate greed, the billionaire tax breaks, all while we struggle to just to get by.”

Simone Del Rosario:

Inflation continues to affect Americans in 2025; consumer prices are up 3% on the year while the cost of staples like eggs continue to soar.

Wages marginally outpaced prices in 2024, up 3.7% for the year. Meanwhile, shareholders had a great year. The S&P 500 climbed 23% while the Nasdaq jumped more than 28%.

An Economist/YouGov poll taken earlier this week found inflation and prices remain the top issue for 23% of respondents, followed by jobs and the economy at 12%.

Meanwhile, consumer confidence slumped in February, according to The Conference Board. The 7-point decline is “the largest monthly decline since August 2021,” and marks an 8-month low.

The People’s Union claims disrupting the economy for a single day will send a powerful message. But in the same breath, they say the intended targets won’t listen. The website reads, “If they don’t listen (they wont) we make the next blackout longer (We will).”

Koen Pauwels:

If this simply moves purchases to today or Saturday that would have otherwise occurred, I don’t think the companies would mind, right? They wouldn’t mind their Friday sales to dip if they just make it up the next day.

Simone Del Rosario:

For more on whether this boycott and others will have any measurable impact, I’m joined by Koen Pauwels, Associate Dean of Research and Distinguished Professor of Marketing at Northeastern University.

Professor, boycotts make headlines, hi, we’re talking about it here today. But do they make an impact?

Koen Pauwels:

Well, most often they don’t make an impact. I mean, that’s what research says, specifically not on the sales or market share of the companies that are being boycotted. There’s great research that shows it does dent company’s reputation, and that if they are prolonged, and so if, if they are under the threat of being renewed. Investors do just downward their future expectations about the profits of a company.

Simone Del Rosario:

But in this situation, a one day boycott is this simply about sending a message.

Koen Pauwels:

It’s very much about sending a message. So what I typically say about what makes a boycott effective is, number one, you get enough participation, and I think that’s what the organizers are hoping for, right? So if you claim to be representing the people, you need some people to participate in this boycott. But number two, for a boycott to be really effective, you also have to be very specific in your demands, so it should be something that the organization you’re boycotting can actually do. And my typical example is a few years ago, right? So there were thing it was the organization was called Moms, you know, against gun violence in America. They boycotted Starbucks only on Saturdays until they, you know, stopped allowing guns in their stores. So it was only on Saturdays. It was one specific day So Starbucks could see the dip in their sales, just like, you know, tomorrow’s boycott is, it’s limited in time, so that also means that moms could participate in it, because giving up Starbucks completely was very different than only giving up on Saturdays. And so the company could see it. It was a very specific demand they could actually execute upon. So tomorrow’s demands are a bit vague in terms of, you know, what do companies actually do to deserve this, and how can they make it stop for the future?

Simone Del Rosario:

Yeah, based off the criteria that you just put forward. You know, this seems to be driven by one person in particular. I know that it is gaining some traction on social media, and you know, it’s happening at the same time that some other boycotts are happening as well. But to your point about specific demands, nothing in these demands appear to be specific,

Koen Pauwels:

no, and to some extent, and you see that in the core right boycotts are, I wouldn’t call it the last resort, but are kind of a cry of the powerless. So people right now feel that some things are being decided above their heads. Town halls are being canceled, so you can’t even talk to your chosen representatives. So a big question would be, what, what on earth can you do? And if you you know, can vote with your money for one day and make your voice being heard that way, that seems to be at least a first. Step in a process that leads to empowering people

Simone Del Rosario:

and consumers do speak with their dollars. A recent poll showed that 45% of Democrats and 34% of Republicans said they recently stopped shopping at certain companies with differing political views. People move with their feet. They move with their dollars. So it is something that we see. And one of the most successful boycotts recently was the conservative boycott of Bud Light. What made that boycott impactful, while others remain mostly symbolic?

Koen Pauwels:

So I think number one, when, when companies take certain stances, they typically, you know, think very carefully about who their actual target audience is, like, who’s buying my products or services. So back in the day, so I wrote the case about Nike with Dream crazy and Colin Kaepernick, right? So Nike was not concerned about some old white dudes like me burning sneakers. I mean, we’re not in the big sneaker buying mode, so in this case, but like, you know, was upsetting a major part of its actual target audience. And you actually see that in their Super Bowl ads of a few weeks ago, right, that they’re desperately trying to get back into bro culture, or whatever it is, but it’s, it’s, you know, in my professional view, it’s not such a good attempt to do that. So, so I think kind of, you know, look at, look at your target audience, and see which kind of people are not buying from you tomorrow. And so in case there’s a lot of participation, exactly, from those customers that are frequent or heavy buyers from companies, they will feel it, and they will think about what they should do as a result. Now

Simone Del Rosario:

this 24 hour boycott aside, a lot of retailers are facing potential boycotts or ongoing boycotts related to getting rid of their diversity, equity and inclusion policies. Target seems to be the biggest target here. What do you think about these calls for boycotting retailers over these policies. Is that more in line with specificity that you talked about, or will these also kind of go the way of other boycotts and be more symbolic than impactful? So

Koen Pauwels:

I find them much more specific also because you can identify lots of companies that continue with dei practices. So you can say to a company in a certain sector, hey, I’m not going to shop with you. I’m going to shop with your competitor who maintains it. I also want to make the big kind of difference, because I’ve researched Brent activism in authenticity. So some of the companies who are at night cutting the practices, you can see that it’s just a big sigh of relief. They never really believed in it, or at least leadership. So they did it because it was politically expedient a few years ago, and so now they’re shifting. But you know, if you can look at their behavior, I mean, how many of their managers, top level leaders, were diverse, or did they simply spend some kind of, you know, we have greenwashing and sustainability. I don’t know what it’s called here, but so a lot of companies, kind of in the perception of consumers, have been pretty kind of in authentic or hypocrite in promoting these practices and just making sure everybody follows the training, but not actually implementing the spirits in their leadership and in the main decisions they make. So those companies kind of, you know, switching capes or, you know, our jackets, that’s kind of changing for the winter and the summer here in Boston. But I think companies that really kind of, you know, walk the talk and stood by it, these are the kind of companies who will be emboldened by consumers protesting and will say, hey, you know, we’re doing something that’s currently going against the grain, because we believe in it and we’re not standing alone. Some consumers, at least, are out there voting with their money and punishing the companies that go against these principles and rewarding those that do so. A lot of this boycotting consumer protest is basically emboldening internal stakeholders, the actual decision makers that can go one way or another and will feel basically hardened by the fact that, hey, there’s at least part of the public that also believes in what we do.

Simone Del Rosario:

But do you think, ultimately, if there is a sustained boycott against target, do you think target will actually be hurt by it?

Koen Pauwels:

A sustained boycott would hurt target? I think, I think how it, how it calculates into the company. Decision Making. I’m not a decision maker within target, but, but leadership. It’s a free market, so companies are ultimately, you know, accountable to their shareholders, right to their stakeholders, and a prolonged sales dip and profit or reputation dip will be a major factor in a decision about what to do next. All right,

Simone Del Rosario:

COVID pals, Associate Dean of Research and distinguished professor of marketing at Northeastern University. Thank you so much for your time

Koen Pauwels:

today. Thank you very much, Imam.