Tony the Tiger gets kicked in the balls

water505

Literotica Guru
Joined
Nov 6, 2016
Posts
4,517
Kellogg's announced last week they would no longer advertise on Breitbart because they "don't align with our company's values." They're certainly within their rights to spend their ad dollars as they see fit, but instead of doing it quietly they chose to make a political statement and as of today 400,000 people have signed a petition to boycott Kellogg's products.

Someone's head will roll over this.
 
The founder of Kellogg's was one of the leading figures in the late 18th century anti-masturbation movement.

And now they're once again taking a stand against wankers.

History is a circle.
 
Might we expect future Breitbart advertisers to be firms and interests hoping to curry favor with the Tromp gang? Your lobbyists stay in Tromp Towerz; your firms advertise in Tromp-linked media; your money flows into Tromp's pockets; you hope for a backwash of taxpayer effectivo (cash) from your little investments. Can you say, k-l-e-p-t-o-c-r-a-c-y? (With a tiger roar...)
 
Kellogg's announced last week they would no longer advertise on Breitbart because they "don't align with our company's values." They're certainly within their rights to spend their ad dollars as they see fit, but instead of doing it quietly they chose to make a political statement and as of today 400,000 people have signed a petition to boycott Kellogg's products.

Someone's head will roll over this.

Not so much. I'm sure the board of directors will balance the loss of those 400,000 customers against the millions more Kellog's won't lose when somebody notices they're still advertising on Breitbart, after everybody has learned what an alt-right cesspool it has become.
 
Might we expect future Breitbart advertisers to be firms and interests hoping to curry favor with the Tromp gang? Your lobbyists stay in Tromp Towerz; your firms advertise in Tromp-linked media; your money flows into Tromp's pockets; you hope for a backwash of taxpayer effectivo (cash) from your little investments. Can you say, k-l-e-p-t-o-c-r-a-c-y? (With a tiger roar...)

If he weren't such a greedy scumbag what he would do is put his daughter in charge The "Tromp" Foundation and appoint his wife as Secretary of State.*

*She will be the most qualified SecState ever. She has most of Hillary's qualifications (She's a woman, and married a guy that became president she just lacks the brief, carpetbagging Senate stint,) and in addition, speaks several languages and has better tits than Madeleine Albright.
 
I heard that the PepsiCo CEO said that "Trump supporters can take their business elsewhere."

I thought Kelloggs and PepsiCo's base consumers were rednecks who like sugar coated cardboard and caffeine laden syrup?
 
Kellogg's announced last week they would no longer advertise on Breitbart because they "don't align with our company's values." They're certainly within their rights to spend their ad dollars as they see fit...

Actually I don't believe its necessarily within their rights to engage in political discrimination.

Systematic political discrimination is used to keep many points of view marginalized and is really no different than systematic discrimination based on any other characteristic. I have long advocated that Congress add political discrimination to the long and seemingly ever growing list of protected classifications one cannot legally discriminate against.

I hope that now with both houses of Congress controlled by the GOP, President Trump, and a non-liberal majority on the Supreme Court this will soon be enacted.

After all, why is sticking one's dick in a dude's ass entitled to more protection than expressing a political opinion?
 
Might we expect future Breitbart advertisers to be firms and interests hoping to curry favor with the Tromp gang? Your lobbyists stay in Tromp Towerz; your firms advertise in Tromp-linked media; your money flows into Tromp's pockets; you hope for a backwash of taxpayer effectivo (cash) from your little investments. Can you say, k-l-e-p-t-o-c-r-a-c-y? (With a tiger roar...)

In English, please.
 
Not so much. I'm sure the board of directors will balance the loss of those 400,000 customers against the millions more Kellog's won't lose when somebody notices they're still advertising on Breitbart, after everybody has learned what an alt-right cesspool it has become.

How do you measure what you don't lose?
 
Talk about a non-fucking issue...



:rolleyes:

I disagree. I think it's interesting that any company would want to offend half of their customer base. (Insert somebody whingeing about how Hillary won the popular vote.)

Let's assume that they're suddenly going to sell an extra two million boxes of Frosted Flakes in California with this move. The trucks still have to roll to all the distribution warehouses all over the country and you don't want pallets and pallets of Frosted Flakes sitting in warehouses all over the fruited plain.

Hilarious that King Oreo thinks that the fact that a mere four hundred thousand people clicked a link and expressed their displeasure is meaningless to any company. That's a greater number than some of the great liberal boycotts that in total amounted to some free publicity by the compliant media and two or three celebrities castigating some company.
 
I disagree. I think it's interesting that any company would want to offend half of their customer base. (Insert somebody whingeing about how Hillary won the popular vote.)

Let's assume that they're suddenly going to sell an extra two million boxes of Frosted Flakes in California with this move. The trucks still have to roll to all the distribution warehouses all over the country and you don't want pallets and pallets of Frosted Flakes sitting in warehouses all over the fruited plain.

Hilarious that King Oreo thinks that the fact that a mere four hundred thousand people clicked a link and expressed their displeasure is meaningless to any company. That's a greater number than some of the great liberal boycotts that in total amounted to some free publicity by the compliant media and two or three celebrities castigating some company.

I've been saying the same thing for years about Hollywood/Entertainment, but clearly there is marginal effect. If your kid will only eat xyz, then you will buy it because the repercussions are worse than your personal polity.
 
And here I thought this was going to be a furry-BDSM thread...
 
I disagree. I think it's interesting that any company would want to offend half of their customer base. (Insert somebody whingeing about how Hillary won the popular vote.)

Let's assume that they're suddenly going to sell an extra two million boxes of Frosted Flakes in California with this move. The trucks still have to roll to all the distribution warehouses all over the country and you don't want pallets and pallets of Frosted Flakes sitting in warehouses all over the fruited plain.

Hilarious that King Oreo thinks that the fact that a mere four hundred thousand people clicked a link and expressed their displeasure is meaningless to any company. That's a greater number than some of the great liberal boycotts that in total amounted to some free publicity by the compliant media and two or three celebrities castigating some company.

I think you're overestimating the power of Breitbart. A toddler screaming for its Fruit Loops is more powerful then an alt-right website.
 
Evil corporations polluting and purveying poison are ok with the Progressives just as long as they don't advertise on Breitbart.

Got it...:)
 
Agree. Considering customer acquisition costs it was downright downright stupid...and arrogant.

Bulshit.


It's only a blip. Breitbart doesn't have enough viewers to make a difference.

If they are actually serious, then they will make sure they do not advertise on FOX. Until then, it is just a joke...
 
Back
Top