Q for our brand mgmt experts - Delta faces boycott threats for stance on new Georgia voting law
Comments
-
Read the room, maybe PM @iDawg. I think we're all on the same page. Though you have some hair trigger urges that should perhaps be unloaded in the Tug before you come back.89ute said:
Maybe Delta likes conservative governance in the state where their headquarters are located. Delta approves of having to show ID if you want to absentee vote. But the hit piece that is linked in this thread makes Delta out to be an anti-human rights entity that enjoys denying people water. Lead by super objective Keith Olbermann. Delta has a state government affairs team, I'm sure they "fight" in every state for what they think benefits Delta.GreenRiverGatorz said:https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2021/03/29/delta-georgia-voting-law-boycott/
We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
They should not be dragged through the mud for not supporting the liberal agenda. Is Patagonia or Columbia Sportswear vilified by conservatives who do not support climate change?
I don't think this is so much Delta sticking it's neck out as it is the liberal contingency flying off the handle.
The liberal mob you're ranting about is a well known given. Hence the head scratcher of Delta intentionally jumping into that pit of rats. -
If you bring your 12 brothers and sisters and at least four of your wives (we only have one girl ... hi @Doog_de_Jour ), I’ll overlook this brazen attempt at inserting a Tug into the Club.89ute said:
Maybe Delta likes conservative governance in the state where their headquarters are located. Delta approves of having to show ID if you want to absentee vote. But the hit piece that is linked in this thread makes Delta out to be an anti-human rights entity that enjoys denying people water. Lead by super objective Keith Olbermann. Delta has a state government affairs team, I'm sure they "fight" in every state for what they think benefits Delta.GreenRiverGatorz said:https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2021/03/29/delta-georgia-voting-law-boycott/
We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
They should not be dragged through the mud for not supporting the liberal agenda. Is Patagonia or Columbia Sportswear vilified by conservatives who do not support climate change?
I don't think this is so much Delta sticking it's neck out as it is the liberal contingency flying off the handle. -
Us? Utah guysm can be a little simpleton at times. I’ll take my pod @89ute to the Salt Lake Cuntry Club for an etiquette lesson.creepycoug said:
If you bring your 12 brothers and sisters and at least four of your wives (we only have one girl ... hi @Doog_de_Jour ), I’ll overlook this brazen attempt at inserting a Tug into the Club.89ute said:
Maybe Delta likes conservative governance in the state where their headquarters are located. Delta approves of having to show ID if you want to absentee vote. But the hit piece that is linked in this thread makes Delta out to be an anti-human rights entity that enjoys denying people water. Lead by super objective Keith Olbermann. Delta has a state government affairs team, I'm sure they "fight" in every state for what they think benefits Delta.GreenRiverGatorz said:https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2021/03/29/delta-georgia-voting-law-boycott/
We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
They should not be dragged through the mud for not supporting the liberal agenda. Is Patagonia or Columbia Sportswear vilified by conservatives who do not support climate change?
I don't think this is so much Delta sticking it's neck out as it is the liberal contingency flying off the handle.
We have a meaningful, IRL frenship of the kind Bob really admires. -
I really thought I kept an even keel.GreenRiverGatorz said:
Read the room, maybe PM @iDawg. I think we're all on the same page. Though you have some hair trigger urges that should perhaps be unloaded in the Tug before you come back.89ute said:
Maybe Delta likes conservative governance in the state where their headquarters are located. Delta approves of having to show ID if you want to absentee vote. But the hit piece that is linked in this thread makes Delta out to be an anti-human rights entity that enjoys denying people water. Lead by super objective Keith Olbermann. Delta has a state government affairs team, I'm sure they "fight" in every state for what they think benefits Delta.GreenRiverGatorz said:https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2021/03/29/delta-georgia-voting-law-boycott/
We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
They should not be dragged through the mud for not supporting the liberal agenda. Is Patagonia or Columbia Sportswear vilified by conservatives who do not support climate change?
I don't think this is so much Delta sticking it's neck out as it is the liberal contingency flying off the handle.
The liberal mob you're ranting about is a well known given. Hence the head scratcher of Delta intentionally jumping into that pit of rats.
I don't find what Delta did much of a head scratcher. The fact that they openly supported a conservative viewpoint may be a beginning. Nobody questions a company supporting a progressive or liberal view. No cries for boycott. It's become acceptable. I am thinking Delta did this to show other companies it's okay to have a conservative viewpoint. Other than Chick-fil-A, not many if any mainstream companies have supported something conservative. It's not going to hurt Delta in my opinion. If other companies start to do similar things than maybe my opinion of what Delta is doing might be correct. If it's okay to be progressive, why can't it be okay to be conservative? I think this is what Delta is doing. -
Well then I'll give you credit for that take. I don't particularly subscribe to it since their stance was scripted as very "both sides", but hats off to them if they truly are trying to be a first mover among blue chip companies going against the zeitgeist.89ute said:
I really thought I kept an even keel.GreenRiverGatorz said:
Read the room, maybe PM @iDawg. I think we're all on the same page. Though you have some hair trigger urges that should perhaps be unloaded in the Tug before you come back.89ute said:
Maybe Delta likes conservative governance in the state where their headquarters are located. Delta approves of having to show ID if you want to absentee vote. But the hit piece that is linked in this thread makes Delta out to be an anti-human rights entity that enjoys denying people water. Lead by super objective Keith Olbermann. Delta has a state government affairs team, I'm sure they "fight" in every state for what they think benefits Delta.GreenRiverGatorz said:https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2021/03/29/delta-georgia-voting-law-boycott/
We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
They should not be dragged through the mud for not supporting the liberal agenda. Is Patagonia or Columbia Sportswear vilified by conservatives who do not support climate change?
I don't think this is so much Delta sticking it's neck out as it is the liberal contingency flying off the handle.
The liberal mob you're ranting about is a well known given. Hence the head scratcher of Delta intentionally jumping into that pit of rats.
I don't find what Delta did much of a head scratcher. The fact that they openly supported a conservative viewpoint may be a beginning. Nobody questions a company supporting a progressive or liberal view. No cries for boycott. It's become acceptable. I am thinking Delta did this to show other companies it's okay to have a conservative viewpoint. Other than Chick-fil-A, not many if any mainstream companies have supported something conservative. It's not going to hurt Delta in my opinion. If other companies start to do similar things than maybe my opinion of what Delta is doing might be correct. If it's okay to be progressive, why can't it be okay to be conservative? I think this is what Delta is doing. -
I myself agree with @GreenRiverGatorz : If it doesn’t at least indirectly relate to flying I’m not using valuable company airspace on it. I no more look to Delta for moral guidance than I look to Brad Pitt.89ute said:
I really thought I kept an even keel.GreenRiverGatorz said:
Read the room, maybe PM @iDawg. I think we're all on the same page. Though you have some hair trigger urges that should perhaps be unloaded in the Tug before you come back.89ute said:
Maybe Delta likes conservative governance in the state where their headquarters are located. Delta approves of having to show ID if you want to absentee vote. But the hit piece that is linked in this thread makes Delta out to be an anti-human rights entity that enjoys denying people water. Lead by super objective Keith Olbermann. Delta has a state government affairs team, I'm sure they "fight" in every state for what they think benefits Delta.GreenRiverGatorz said:https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2021/03/29/delta-georgia-voting-law-boycott/
We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
They should not be dragged through the mud for not supporting the liberal agenda. Is Patagonia or Columbia Sportswear vilified by conservatives who do not support climate change?
I don't think this is so much Delta sticking it's neck out as it is the liberal contingency flying off the handle.
The liberal mob you're ranting about is a well known given. Hence the head scratcher of Delta intentionally jumping into that pit of rats.
I don't find what Delta did much of a head scratcher. The fact that they openly supported a conservative viewpoint may be a beginning. Nobody questions a company supporting a progressive or liberal view. No cries for boycott. It's become acceptable. I am thinking Delta did this to show other companies it's okay to have a conservative viewpoint. Other than Chick-fil-A, not many if any mainstream companies have supported something conservative. It's not going to hurt Delta in my opinion. If other companies start to do similar things than maybe my opinion of what Delta is doing might be correct. If it's okay to be progressive, why can't it be okay to be conservative? I think this is what Delta is doing. -
Airlines all know that they are sharing the same customerscreepycoug said:
My take: nobody is ever going to make a flight decision based on culture war stuff. They're going with their favorite airlines and price. "Favorite" is less about brand, IMO, and more about their collective flight experiences. I like Delta, and I'm selfish, like most people, and so unless they are supporting something that truly sickens me, I'm flying with them if the ticket price is close.GreenRiverGatorz said:https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2021/03/29/delta-georgia-voting-law-boycott/
We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
Plus, there are the loyalty programs. Once you've committed to one or two airlines, you tend to want to keep racking up rewards when you travel.
Yeah, there are those marginal folks who are all hopped up. But then again, the entire Aberdeen crowd was set to boycott "Fakebook" and about 40 other channels of entertainment. Like @RaceBannon , they haven't moved.
Mostly people are full of shit. Talk a big game online, but IRL they do what they want to do.
Bottom line: agree with your take, but with a twist. Nothing to gain, and really nothing to lose. NOC. -
-
@SledogRaceBannon said:Q?
-
You did. We're just here for your amusement in the hopes that you will bring your extended (89ute said:
I really thought I kept an even keel.GreenRiverGatorz said:
Read the room, maybe PM @iDawg. I think we're all on the same page. Though you have some hair trigger urges that should perhaps be unloaded in the Tug before you come back.89ute said:
Maybe Delta likes conservative governance in the state where their headquarters are located. Delta approves of having to show ID if you want to absentee vote. But the hit piece that is linked in this thread makes Delta out to be an anti-human rights entity that enjoys denying people water. Lead by super objective Keith Olbermann. Delta has a state government affairs team, I'm sure they "fight" in every state for what they think benefits Delta.GreenRiverGatorz said:https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2021/03/29/delta-georgia-voting-law-boycott/
We're veering dangerously close to Tug territory here, so I urge everyone to stay on their best behavior. But this particular angle has less to do with the law itself, and more to do with Delta deciding to proactively sprint into such a hot political issue.
2020 was a year that saw corporate America act as a collective weathercock and put out countless statements with generic support for all of the hot-button cultural issues. My read is that most executives are generally loathe to wade into these waters and much prefer the business of old whereby money was the only politics that mattered. Hard to say if this moment is short lived or if the agnostic days of old are gone forever.
What's curious about this case is that Delta would seemingly choose to stick their neck out to voice support for an issue that they knew was going to buy them blowback from the Twitter crowd. What am I missing here? What the fuck does Delta have to gain for taking a stance here? I'm sure there's a business rationale buried in here somewhere, but I can't seem to find it.
They should not be dragged through the mud for not supporting the liberal agenda. Is Patagonia or Columbia Sportswear vilified by conservatives who do not support climate change?
I don't think this is so much Delta sticking it's neck out as it is the liberal contingency flying off the handle.
The liberal mob you're ranting about is a well known given. Hence the head scratcher of Delta intentionally jumping into that pit of rats.
I don't find what Delta did much of a head scratcher. The fact that they openly supported a conservative viewpoint may be a beginning. Nobody questions a company supporting a progressive or liberal view. No cries for boycott. It's become acceptable. I am thinking Delta did this to show other companies it's okay to have a conservative viewpoint. Other than Chick-fil-A, not many if any mainstream companies have supported something conservative. It's not going to hurt Delta in my opinion. If other companies start to do similar things than maybe my opinion of what Delta is doing might be correct. If it's okay to be progressive, why can't it be okay to be conservative? I think this is what Delta is doing.
) family to the Club. We're trolling for clicks.
