A few weeks ago, shortly after the appearance of the meme-generating Nike Apparel ad campaign featuring Colin Kaepernick proclaiming "Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything," I posted some thoughts here. In brief, I observed that Kaepernick had turned a political principle into an opportunity for corporate gain.
But not only Kaepernick, mind you, but "Big Eva" American Evangelicalism. After all, just as consumer-capitalism happily turns political principles into a means to sell more and more stuff, it is also the case that "much of evangelicalism is built around the reality of the self-expressive, individualistic, and autonomous religious consumer." American Evangelicalism is as market-oriented as any other consumer "product."
Some might wonder, however, if the Kaepernick co-opt was actually beneficial to Nike. After all, at least one institutional buyer of athletic apparel threatened to drop its Nike affiliation.
But don't shed a tear for Nike, it's doing just fine notwithstanding the internet blowback about its decision to feature Kaepernick as one of its public faces. Go here to read that as of September 20 the market value of Nike stock had increased by $6 billion since the debut of the Kaepernick campaign. (Of course, Kaepernick wasn't Nike's only featured celebrity but he was certainly the most newsworthy.) . In addition, quoting the linked post, "'The company has sold out 61 percent more merchandise since releasing its Kaepernick ad,' Reuters reported. Nike also discounted fewer products in the 10-day period after the ad compared to the 10-day period before its release."
Such a commercial success should certainly warm the hearts of those for whom increasing the shareholder bottom-line is the the final purpose of a corporation. I posted about this point here where I critiqued the view that corporate purpose should be reduced to maximizing wealth. What I find ironic are folks who decry Kaepernick as un-American, who threaten to boycott Nike, and who at the same time believe that corporations have any duty not to grow their bottom lines. Moralism at one end of public discourse should, one might think, lead to some moral judgment at the other. Unless, of course, one's notions of morality ends at one's 401(k).
But not only Kaepernick, mind you, but "Big Eva" American Evangelicalism. After all, just as consumer-capitalism happily turns political principles into a means to sell more and more stuff, it is also the case that "much of evangelicalism is built around the reality of the self-expressive, individualistic, and autonomous religious consumer." American Evangelicalism is as market-oriented as any other consumer "product."
Some might wonder, however, if the Kaepernick co-opt was actually beneficial to Nike. After all, at least one institutional buyer of athletic apparel threatened to drop its Nike affiliation.
But don't shed a tear for Nike, it's doing just fine notwithstanding the internet blowback about its decision to feature Kaepernick as one of its public faces. Go here to read that as of September 20 the market value of Nike stock had increased by $6 billion since the debut of the Kaepernick campaign. (Of course, Kaepernick wasn't Nike's only featured celebrity but he was certainly the most newsworthy.) . In addition, quoting the linked post, "'The company has sold out 61 percent more merchandise since releasing its Kaepernick ad,' Reuters reported. Nike also discounted fewer products in the 10-day period after the ad compared to the 10-day period before its release."
Such a commercial success should certainly warm the hearts of those for whom increasing the shareholder bottom-line is the the final purpose of a corporation. I posted about this point here where I critiqued the view that corporate purpose should be reduced to maximizing wealth. What I find ironic are folks who decry Kaepernick as un-American, who threaten to boycott Nike, and who at the same time believe that corporations have any duty not to grow their bottom lines. Moralism at one end of public discourse should, one might think, lead to some moral judgment at the other. Unless, of course, one's notions of morality ends at one's 401(k).
No comments:
Post a Comment