Pride Month Profiteering And The Rise Of Pink Capitalism

Each year in June, LGBTQ+ Pride Month is celebrated in the U.S. to commemorate the Stonewall riots that took place in NYC during June 1969. This historic event marked the beginning of annual LGBTQ+ Pride celebrations, marches and other events to recognize the LGBTQ+ community around the world each June. Since then, awareness and acceptance of this movement has grown considerably, especially coinciding with the conclusion of Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, which required all states in the U.S. to grant and recognize same-sex marriages.

Over the last decade, the effects of this more widespread acceptance have resulted in an interesting, and often controversial, consequence among businesses and large corporations -- namely the rise in brand activism and the commercialization of related events. In recent years, countless brands have chosen to involve themselves in Pride Month by changing their logos to incorporate the LGBTQ+ rainbow flag, releasing statements or hosting events and speaking out to show their support on social media.

While the list of brands continues to increase each year and many are graciously accepted, not all of their attempts are met with open arms. As public opinion consistently trends in favor of LGBTQ+ rights and the rise of pink capitalism (the targeted inclusion of the gay community and its growing purchasing power) becomes more important to corporations, brand activism in the space will only continue to grow in the years to come.

In 2012, Google was one of the first large corporations to kickstart this trend after it began displaying some LGBTQ+-related search results alongside rainbow patterns each June. Coinciding with a 2019 study by the Pew Research Center that shows the majority of the American general public’s views on LGBTQ+ issues, such as same-sex marriage, more and more brands continued to follow suit throughout the 2010s.

In 2019, Pride Month saw unparalleled support from brands, but not always with success. One of the most noteworthy blunders came from Victoria’s Secret, who pledged a $100,000 donation in celebration of Pride Month. Despite their efforts to show support, users online were quick to point out that their actions directly contradicted what Ed Razek, the company’s chief marketing officer, said in 2018 about the inclusion of transgender models.

In 2020, the trend of brand activism for Pride Month increased even further, but companies continued to contradict themselves and be labeled as attempting to exploit the movement merely for money. When Bethesda Softworks began applying the rainbow filter to their brand logos in early June, many online noticed a distinct line was drawn between where it was safe to show their support. The brand chose to alter its logo for all accounts except those based in Russia, Turkey and the Middle East, so when social media took notice, they were demonized online and their support was largely written off as an empty platitude.

These types of brand activism are often referred to as “slacktivism” and are criticized by many for their lack of impact. One such example of support for 2020’s Pride Month that was praised comes from Reebok, who has a consistent history of supporting and celebrating the LGBTQ+ community. This year, the brand donated $75,000 from its “All Types of Love” Pride collection in addition to collaborating with members of the LGBTQ+ community to help share their stories for a campaign called “Proud Notes,” which was well-received online.

In a 2018 Vox article, titled “How LGBTQ+ Pride Month became a branded holiday,” a comparison was drawn between the similarities of commercializing movements and events in the past, particularly with Breast Cancer Awareness month. As support for that movement boomed in the 2000s and early 2010s, commercialization crept in and brands began adding pink filters or ribbons to logos, creating awareness and releasing a slew of pink products for consumers to buy in hopes of supporting the cause.

Ultimately, however, a lot of that commercialized support was pretty empty and resulted in little change. A 2015 New York Times article, called “A Growing Disenchantment With October ‘Pinkification,’” pointed out that incidences of breast cancer were nearly flat and no cure was on the horizon. When asked for comment about the issue, Karuna Jaggar, the executive director of Breast Cancer Action, said, “What do we have to show for the billions spent on pink ribbon products? A lot of us are done with awareness. We want action.”

The apathy from many online over the annual sweep of rainbow-filtered logos and empty statements on social media closely mimics what’s been seen with other movements in the past, so people are likely to continue their dismissive views of how certain corporations choose to wave their brand activism until they prove it’s about more than just money.