Calls to boycott Disney grew last week after ABC suspended “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” Disney now says the late-night show will return Tuesday night following “thoughtful conversations with Jimmy,” according to Variety. With the story continuing to develop, it remains unclear how the reversal will affect ongoing backlash which sparked protests, celebrity withdrawals and raises questions about whether boycotts actually work.
Shortly after the announcement, calls to boycott Disney companies surged. Musicians Sarah McLachlan and Jewel pulled out of performances Sunday tied to a new Disney documentary.
“I know you’re expecting a performance tonight, and I’m so grateful to all of you for coming, and I apologize if this is disappointing, but we have collectively decided not to perform but instead to stand in solidarity in support of free speech,” McLachlan said in a statement shared with The Hollywood Reporter.
Protests in Hollywood and Burbank
Protesters gathered outside the El Capitan Theatre on Hollywood Boulevard, where “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” tapes, and outside Walt Disney Studios in Burbank.
As SAN recently reported, some Disney+ users reported that the cancellation portal for subscriptions briefly crashed amid the wave of boycotts.
Why people turn to boycotts
Koen Pauwels, a distinguished professor of marketing at Northeastern University, said boycotts often happen when other methods of protest feel exhausted.
“You can go and protest, you can write letters to your representatives,” he said. “But I think a boycott is really when you feel that you have exhausted these options.”
Even then, Pauwels suggested they may not always be successful.
“Their effectiveness is very murky, and research hasn’t shown that it’s that effective,” he said. “However, people often feel it’s the one thing they can do and control. So even if it doesn’t work immediately, many do it out of principle.”
Streaming services like Disney+ present a challenge. Subscriptions naturally fluctuate as people join for specific shows and cancel when they end. Pauwels said boycotts have to show a clear and lasting signal.
He described three steps that make a boycott more effective: the company must notice the impact, the effort should allow broad participation, and the demand must be feasible.
A case study in Starbucks
One example came in 2013, when Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America organized a “Skip Starbucks Saturday” boycott to protest the chain’s gun policies.
“Make sure that the organization actually realizes what you’re doing, and that’s easier if you target specific times,” Pauwels said.
By the time the Moms Demand Action boycott launched, the group had already gathered more than 13,000 signatures. That number grew to 60,000, and two months later, Starbucks announced a policy shift that discouraged the carrying of guns in its stores.
“The other good thing is to make sure you have a broad tent that lots of people can join,” Pauwels said. “And three, have a demand that is actually feasible for the organization to do.”
‘Buycotts’ and other forms of action
Another form of action organizers aim for is an economic blackout, similar to the one activists launched in June over McDonald’s DEI policy changes. Pauwels told SAN that this form of a boycott is often too vague and makes it harder for any CEO or company to know what action to take in response.
Because economic blackouts lack focus, the impact can often “disappear in the noise” of normal business fluctuations. By contrast, the Disney boycott has a specific trigger and demand –– the suspension of “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” and calls to reinstate it.
However, not all movements involve boycotts or economic blackouts. Sometimes, consumers organize “buycotts,” where they increase purchases to support a company’s stance.
“It’s basically aiming to counteract the boycott,” Pauwels said. “Sometimes, sales actually increase.”
Disney’s bigger picture
Even if cancellations spike, Disney may not feel pressured to change course. Pauwels noted that corporations often weigh political and business relationships more heavily than consumer backlash.
“Maybe their dealings with the current U.S. administration are worth way more than any boycott,” he said. “So if the company decides that reason is more important, the boycott won’t have a huge effect.”
Disney’s vast portfolio, which includes theme parks, ABC, ESPN, Hulu, film studios and merchandise, makes it harder to dent the company in one area. At the same time, Pauwels warned that breadth also makes Disney more vulnerable if the boycott spreads across all industries.
Market reaction
Disney’s stock price dipped by about 3% in the days following Kimmel’s suspension. However, despite reports that circulated over the weekend, there is no clear evidence that the company lost billions.
For now, the word of a boycott continues to spread on social media. Organizers hope the movement will hit Disney where it matters most — its bottom line.
The post ABC reinstates Kimmel to late night – is this proof boycotts work? appeared first on Straight Arrow News.