SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
boycott
Trump Event Broadcast With No Audio After He Booted Press Pool Members
A host on the Trump-friendly Newsmax network said it seemed his exile of the press was "backfiring just a little bit.”
Sep 21, 2026
It turns out that President Donald Trump may not have thought through all the consequences before he banned some of his most hated news outlets from the White House.
After Trump declared CNN, MS NOW, and Politico "fake news" and exiled them from the White House grounds on Friday, the other networks that make up the White House press pool—including ABC, CBS, NBC, and even Fox News—agreed to boycott their pool duties on Monday in solidarity with the banned outlets.
"There will be no replacement pool put in place," wrote Bryan Boughton, Fox News’ Washington bureau chief and chair of the White House television pool, in an internal notice to news organizations obtained by Politico.
It became clear exactly what that meant when the White House attempted to broadcast a ribbon-cutting ceremony for Trump's new helipad on the White House lawn on Monday afternoon.
The president's voice could be heard faintly. But his words were inaudible over the whir of a helicopter parked nearby.
"There's no microphone because the pool cameras aren't there," explained Bianca de la Garza, who was covering the event for the Trump-friendly outlet Newsmax.
The anchor said this was maybe "one example" of the president's attack on the media "backfiring just a little bit."
As of Monday afternoon, there is no reported effort by the White House to find a new press pool. This may prove problematic for Trump as he attends the United Nations General Assembly this week.
Meanwhile, the three outlets banned by Trump filed a lawsuit on Monday, arguing that their removal from White House grounds violated the First Amendment. Previous attempts by the Trump administration to ban news outlets from covering its activities have been shot down in court.
Aidan McLaughlin, the Washington correspondent for Vanity Fair, suggested on social media that, at the rate things are going, a lawsuit may not even have been necessary.
"He’s gonna lift the ban by the end of the week," he predicted.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ed Sheeran Openers Quit Tour as Boycott Begins Over 'Silencing' of Macklemore's Palestine Speech
"The Ed Sheeran debacle will be seen as a turning point in pop culture complicity" with Israel, said one Palestinian-American writer, who described it as "a clear 'South Africa moment.'”
Sep 16, 2026
Singer Ed Sheeran hoped to sidestep controversy by letting rapper Macklemore be removed from his tour over his pro-Palestine remarks. Instead, he's sparked what one writer said could be a "turning point" for how pop culture engages on the issue of Israel and Palestine.
Sheeran responded to the backlash on Tuesday by claiming he was helpless to stop Macklemore’s ouster, which followed the intervention of the pro-Israel New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft, who rallied other NFL venue owners to bar Sheeran's Loop Tour if the “Thrift Shop” rapper continued to perform.
Pro-Israel groups petitioned for Macklemore to be removed from the tour after a performance earlier this month in which he said, “Free Palestine,” and performed his song “Hind’s Hall." The song refers to anti-Israel protests at Columbia University in 2024 and is dedicated to the 5-year-old Palestinian girl Hind Rajab, who was killed by Israeli forces. She was one of more than 20,000 children who have been killed as part of Israel’s military campaign there, according to a UN commission.
But the other four openers said they would not abide what they viewed as elites' political censorship of an artist speaking out against what human rights groups have described as a genocide in Gaza and an occupation of the West Bank that is considered illegal under international law.
Each one of the artists announced on Tuesday that they would no longer tour with Sheeran.
“Artists must not be silenced when they speak up for the oppressed," said the Grammy-winning singer-songwriter Finneas, who has vocally supported the plight of Palestinians for several years. "I stand with Palestine and its people."
The Irish singer Aaron Rowe likewise withdrew from his upcoming shows with Sheeran, though he acknowledged he did not "take the decision lightly."
"Ed has been a friend to me and has changed my life. I could never thank him enough for this," Rowe wrote on Instagram. "But as Irish people, we know all too well about genocide, forced famine, and violent occupation."
“I cannot stand by and allow billionaires to use their position of power to silence the rightful voices of those who speak up against Israeli genocide and who highlight the savage murder of children,” he continued. “I would lose all respect for myself to carry on as normal.”
The Danish pop band Lukas Graham also dropped from the tour, with frontman Lukas Forchhammer writing that artists "should be able to speak about war, about civilians being killed, about children who deserve to grow up. Wherever they live. Whatever flag flies over them."
Forchhammer addressed Kraft, a multibillionaire, who gloated after the fact about having Macklemore blackballed and denounced his expressions of support for Palestinians as "hate speech."
"Money doesn’t give you the right to own the conversation," Forchhammer wrote. "Nobody’s bank balance should decide who gets to speak or which suffering we’re allowed to acknowledge.”
The Irish folk group Beoga—which helped to found the Irish Artist for Palestine Movement—was even more direct, calling out Kraft’s extensive history of donating to pro-Israel groups, including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which has spent over $100 million attempting to influence the current election cycle, and supporting efforts to punish those who boycott Israeli products.
"It's important that everyone knows that the real enemy is the Zionist lobby. They have worked tirelessly to silence artists who want to speak freely about a genocide happening before our eyes, for fear of retribution," Beoga wrote. "Research how much Robert Kraft has done to fight the [Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions] (BDS) movement. That will give you a sense of what we've all been up against."
"Up the workers. Free Palestine," the group's message concluded.
The exodus of Sheeran’s openers came as momentum built behind a “boycott” of his music spearheaded by the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, a group based in Ramallah in the West Bank, that helped to cofound the BDS movement.
The group called on Sheeran to "cancel his now compromised US tour" and said until then, artists, audience, and crew members should "boycott it."
In response to Sheeran's explanation that he prefers not to publicly take sides on controversial political issues despite having opinions, the group noted his estimated net worth of more than $500 million and his massive platform as one of the world's most recognized musicians.
"As South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu famously said, 'If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor,'" the group said. "Sheeran had an opportunity to take a stand in solidarity with Palestinians, like millions of other British and Irish citizens have done, and refuse to cave to the pressure... He has so far failed to meet this ethical duty. But it is not too late to reverse course."
Some Western politicians have joined the backlash and amplified calls for a boycott.
US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), considered a likely presidential candidate in 2028, told a reporter she'd be changing the radio station if Ed Sheeran's music were to come on.
"When you see what Robert Kraft did to line up all the stadiums to censor speech in that one specific way, it's become clear it's not just about one music artist or two music artists," AOC said. "This is about how just a handful of stadium owners and the elite can prevent an entire massive issue, in this case, the genocide in Gaza."
"But it doesn't stop there," she continued. "It could be speaking out about AI. It could be speaking out about any issue, that you can now just get a handful of stadium owners to ensure that an entire person's career can be jeopardized if they speak out about any issue."
Zarah Sultana, a member of the UK Parliament and co-founder of the left-wing Your Party, added that the artists who left Sheeran's tour are "on the right side of history."
“At this rate, Ed Sheeran is going to end up with Boy George opening for him,” she joked on social media, referring to the singer who released a song this summer in support of Israel's assault on Gaza. “No one deserves to be subjected to that.”
Backlash against Sheeran has expanded across the entertainment industry as well, with performers including the children's entertainer Ms. Rachel and popular musicians Kehlani, Tones and I, Zara Larsson, PinkPantheress, and others rallying in support of Macklemore.
And as the music news site Consequence of Sound reported, even some of Sheeran's hardcore fans are revolting. Three prominent Sheeran fan accounts on X, which boast nearly 50,000 followers put together, spoke in solidarity with Macklemore and encouraged Sheeran to use his platform to take a stand, with some vowing to stop covering his tour until he does.
"We hope that Ed can... reflect on everything that happened and understand that, in the face of certain injustices, remaining silent or trying not to choose a side is also a stance," wrote the Brazilian account @EdSheeranBrCom, which has more than 45,000 followers.
Ali Abunimah, the Palestinian-American journalist who co-founded The Electronic Intifada, said in a social media post that he believed that "the Ed Sheeran debacle will be seen as a turning point in pop culture complicity" with Israel, which has seen public support in the US crater since 2023, to the point where Americans, especially younger ones, now say they sympathize more with Palestinians than Israelis.
Likening it to the massive cultural boycott movement against apartheid during the 1980s, Abunimah said the cultural revolt against Sheeran was "a clear 'South Africa moment.'”
Keep ReadingShow Less
12,000 Starbucks Workers Call for Boycott of Law-Breaking Coffee Chain
"We know when working people stand up together, we win."
Aug 25, 2026
Starbucks workers who have joined the unionizing effort that started in Buffalo, New York in 2021 and has spread to over 700 stores across the country called on all working people to show solidarity by boycotting the coffee chain, which has refused to finalize a union contract and has been accused of hundreds of labor violations.
"What we’re fighting for is simple: a minimum $17 per hour wage, enough hours to live on, better staffing in our stores, and basic workplace protections," said Starbucks Workers United (SWU) Tuesday. "Every year, our living costs rise, but our wages don’t keep up—a growing pressure many American workers are feeling as corporate greed accelerates unchecked in our country."
While the company "fuels working people" across the country every day, said the union, "it's failing the workers who fuel its profits"—which rose to $25.5 billion in 2025.
Starbucks and the union returned to the bargaining table in April after a monthslong nationwide strike, with about 4,500 baristas reportedly picketing at 230 stores in more than 130 cities at the peak of the work stoppage.
SWU was originally calling for a minimum wage of $20 per hour. Baristas in 43 states make $16 per hour and under as a starting wage. The union is calling for 4% annual raises, arguing that inflation has eaten into any benefit provided by small annual raises.
The workers are also calling for a minimum of three staff members in stores at all times.
"The company is notorious for hiring additional workers while current workers are asking for more hours to survive. The union is demanding more hours for existing employees before new hires," reported Labor Notes in April.
The union noted that the National Labor Relations Board and its judges "have found that Starbucks committed hundreds of labor violations and there are currently more than 550 unresolved unfair labor practice charges still pending against the company."
The company has fired workers for organizing, illegally withheld wages and benefits, and illegally surveilled employees.
The call for a boycott coincided with the yearly release of Starbucks' fall menu, including its popular pumpkin spice latte, which generated $2 billion for the company in its first decade.
"Starbucks has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of care for the workers who fuel the company’s profits by wasting millions of dollars on AI and technology that doesn’t work, launching countless gimmicky drinks designed to distract from real problems, and inventing pointless policies that do nothing but make our jobs harder," said SWU.
"This ongoing, irrational behavior by Starbucks and its refusal to settle a fair union contract with workers leaves us with no other choice than to call for a boycott," added the union. "We know when working people stand up together, we win."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Consumers Looking to Avoid Trump Have One Fewer Option in REI
REI’s leadership has endorsed leaders who gutted public lands, greenwashed their use of AI, deployed a union-busting law firm, and rigged their governance structure to shut out different perspectives.
Apr 26, 2026
In the Trump 2.0 era, many Americans have begun to engage in a new “conscious consumerism”—avoiding the companies that have bent the knee to the president. Data firm Numerator found that 38% of US consumers have participated in some form of a boycott over the last year, and 48% said they would stop buying from a company that had differing political views. Some may have felt that outdoor retailer REI would be an ideal place to shop during this time, a home for like-minded, outdoorsy people who care about the environment.
As an REI worker, I’m still expected to evangelize about REI’s mission—the outdoors, sustainability, and community. But ever since we started unionizing at REI in 2022, it’s now become a facade. REI’s leadership has endorsed leaders who gutted public lands, greenwashed their use of AI, deployed a union-busting law firm, and rigged their governance structure to shut out different perspectives. REI, a favorite of outdoor-loving liberals, has gone Trump.
The first public sign came when REI endorsed the Trump administration directly. The executives of the “co-op,” without any direct feedback from the members whose values and opinions they claim to base their decisions on, signed a letter of support for then-nominee for Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, who ended up being confirmed in a vote of 79-18. In the year since his confirmation, Burgum has spent much of his time opening federal lands up to oil and gas drilling and trying to make the “Gulf of America” name stick. While REI’s new CEO has issued an apology since, the damage is already being done.
But throughout our union effort, from organizing to now bargaining, we’ve seen up close how the co-op has aligned itself with President Donald Trump. REI has met our unionization campaign by hiring a law firm with deep ties to pro-business, anti-worker cases, Morgan Lewis. This firm has been contracted to bust unions in everything from Amazon to professional baseball.
As REI has continued to stonewall us at the bargaining table, it’s opened itself up to a new opportunity for “conscious consumerism.” We have authorized a boycott should the company fail to agree on a contract with its 11 unionized stores.
Its reputation has earned the respect of the Trump administration, as the president installed Crystal Carey, a former partner at Morgan Lewis, as the general counsel for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). In that role, Carey is responsible for setting the agenda for the NLRB as it weighs decisions on union elections, unfair labor practices, and more—including major cases regarding our union campaign. Morgan Lewis also handled the president’s taxes for many years. That’s who REI chose to hire—one of Trump’s favorite law firms.
Perhaps the most damning example of how REI is taking a page from the Trump playbook is how they’ve changed their governance structure. As a co-op, REI members elect the board of directors each year, seemingly a symbol of democratic governance and participation. Any co-op member can vote, and any member can run.
Last year, we decided to nominate two members to the board, Tefere Gebre and Shemona Moreno, longtime labor advocates, outdoor enthusiasts, and progressive leaders. Both were ideal candidates for REI’s board, but instead, their candidacies were rejected outright in favor of a slate of candidates handpicked by REI executives.
In response, we urged co-op members to vote down this slate. They responded overwhelmingly in support—members defeated the slate of candidates, and the board was left with multiple vacancies in response. An expression of will like this—again, from the very members whose values the co-op's executives claim impact their decisions—should have prompted REI to look inward and reflect.
Instead, REI took the Trump route. REI didn’t like the results, so they changed the rules. They moved up the board election to December, after holding it in April and May for years. This came in the middle of negotiations, which prevented us from speaking out against this anti-democratic move. Holding the election over the holidays meant participation would be low, and members couldn’t hear another perspective on any of the co-op’s preferred candidates. It’s a microcosm for how Trump is trying to change the rules of our democracy with the SAVE America Act and gerrymandering.
Of course, REI isn’t alone in cowering to the president. Another major retailer, Target, has also kept its head down during the second Trump administration. The company pulled back its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives and remained silent as Immigration and Customs Enforcement ran amok in the company’s home state of Minnesota. And Target has paid the price as it has faced boycotts from customers and protests outside its stores.
While many corporations have bowed their heads to the president, it wasn’t always this way. During the first Trump administration, we even had companies like Microsoft, Google, and Facebook speaking out against Trump’s immigration policies.
As REI has continued to stonewall us at the bargaining table, it’s opened itself up to a new opportunity for “conscious consumerism.” We have authorized a boycott should the company fail to agree on a contract with its 11 unionized stores. We do not take this decision lightly, but we know that REI members and customers have our backs in the fight for a fair contract and in the fight against Trump.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Don't Buy Starbucks!' Says Union as It Launches Nationwide Strike Against Coffee Giant’s Unfair Labor Conditions
As its workers fight for a living wage and for the company to address hundreds of labor violation complaints, Starbucks Workers United says it's prepared for the "biggest and longest" strike in the company's history.
Nov 13, 2025
As hundreds of Starbucks workers go on strike across the US to protest the company's unfair labor practices, its union is telling customers to boycott the company in hopes of pressuring it to return to the bargaining table to negotiate its first union contract.
“As of today, Starbucks workers across the country are officially ON STRIKE,” said Starbucks Workers United, the union representing nearly 10,000 baristas, on social media Thursday. “We’re prepared for this to become the biggest and longest [unfair labor practices] strike in Starbucks history.”
The union implored customers: "DON'T BUY STARBUCKS for the duration of our open-ended ULP strike!"
The strike comes after negotiations between the union and the company stalled out in April. Last week, 92% of union baristas voted to authorize a strike as the company's lucrative holiday season began. They are hoping to turn the company’s annual “Red Cup Day,” during which it gives out free reusable cups to customers, into a “Red Cup Rebellion.”
The union says three of its core demands remain unmet. It has called for the company to address "rampant" understaffing, which it says has led to longer wait times for customers and overwhelmed staff, while simultaneously leaving workers without enough hours to afford the cost of living.
It also seeks higher take-home pay for workers. Starting baristas make just over $15 per hour, which data from MIT shows is not enough to afford the cost of living in any US state when working 40 hours a week. According to the union, most Starbucks workers receive fewer than 20 hours of work per week, rendering them ineligible for benefits.
The union has drawn a contrast between its workers' pay, which averages less than $15,000 a year, and that of CEO Brian Niccol, who raked in a total compensation package of $96 million in just four months after taking over last year.
"Too many of us rely on SNAP or Medicaid just to get by, and most baristas still don’t earn a livable wage. In a majority of states, starting pay is just $15.25 an hour—and even then, we’re not getting the 20 hours a week we need to qualify for benefits," said Jasmine Leli, a barista and strike captain from Buffalo, New York, where the first Starbucks store in the nation voted to unionize back in 2021.
The company has gone nearly four years without recognizing it. While it claims to have engaged with the union in "good faith," the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has found Starbucks guilty of over 500 labor law violations, making it the worst violator in modern history.
These have included illegal firings and disciplinary actions against union organizers, the illegal withholding of wages and benefits, threats to close stores that unionize, and illegal surveillance of employees. More than 700 unfair labor practice charges made against the company remain unresolved, including 125 of them filed since January.
According to an estimate from the Strategic Organizing Center, Starbucks' union-busting had cost the company more than $240 million through February 2024. That money was lost in the form of legal fees and payments to consultants, as well as productivity lost due to anti-union store closures and captive audience meetings.
“Things have only gone backwards at Starbucks under Niccol’s leadership," Leli said. "But a fair union contract and the resolution of hundreds of unfair labor practice charges are essential to the company’s turnaround."
The union has argued that in order to meet their demands for a fair contract, it would cost less than a single day's sales.
The strike begins just days after 85 US lawmakers—led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)—sent letters demanding that the company stop union-busting and negotiate a fair deal with its employees.
"Starbucks is not a poor company," the Senate letter said to Niccol. "Last year, Starbucks made over $3.6 billion in profit and paid out nearly $5 billion in stock buybacks and dividends. In fact, in the first three quarters of the year, Starbucks made $1.7 billion in profit and paid out over $2 billion in dividends. Last year, you made $95 million in compensation for the four months you worked in 2024, roughly 6,666 times more than what your average worker was paid for the entire year."
"Despite that extravagant spending on executives and shareholders, Starbucks refuses to reach an agreement with its own workers even though you are less than one average day’s sales apart from a contract," it continued. "Starbucks must reverse course from its current posture, resolve its existing labor disputes, and bargain a fair contract in good faith with these employees."
The strike will begin at 65 stores across more than 40 US cities, with rallies scheduled in New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Columbus, and Anaheim, among other locations. The union said the strike is "open-ended," with no set end date, and that baristas across more than 550 unionized stores across the country are prepared to join in.
“If Starbucks keeps stonewalling a fair contract and refusing to end union-busting, they’ll see their business grind to a halt,” said Michelle Eisen, a spokesperson for Starbucks Workers United, who has worked as a barista for 15 years. “'No contract, no coffee' is more than a tagline—it’s a pledge to interrupt Starbucks’ operations and profits until a fair union contract and an end to unfair labor practices are won."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Defending Democracy Starts With Your Phone Plan: Why I Cut Ties With T-Mobile
The most effective way to resist the authoritarian takeover of our democracy is to make it clear to companies partnering with authoritarians that there will always be consequences for such business relationships.
Nov 10, 2025
With everything that the Trump administration is doing to militarize our cities and neighborhoods, it can be easy to forget about all of the damage that Elon Musk has done, and continues to do. He and his Department of Government Efficiency minions destroyed the US Agency for International Development, resulting in incredible misery and thousands of deaths in countries around the world. They fired thousands of dedicated civil servants and embedded themselves in all major government agencies, and combined our personal data in illegal ways that make us all more vulnerable.
While Musk isn’t in the headlines as much now, he continues to use his vast wealth to subvert democracy both here and around the world, and will continue to do so unless we fight back. One of the pillars of his empire is Starlink, which leverages Musk’s relationship with President Donald Trump to help it acquire additional spectrum licenses and crush its competition.
The most effective way to resist the authoritarian takeover of our democracy is to make it clear to companies partnering with authoritarians that there will always be consequences for such business relationships. Earlier this year, T-Mobile became the first major cellular carrier to integrate the Starlink network, positioning T-Mobile customers uniquely to help counter Musk's influence.
I was a T-Mobile customer, starting in 2013. My whole family was on T-Mobile, and I had a business account as well. I develop a mobile application for iPhone and Android, so I needed multiple phone lines for software testing.
If you’re a T-Mobile customer, I strongly encourage you to cancel your T-Mobile contract on the weekend of November 14-16 as thousands join me in boycotting T-Mobile.
After becoming active in the Tesla Takedown campaign, I learned about the dangers posed by T-Mobile's partnership with Starlink. I attended protests at local Starlink offices and wrote directly to T-Mobile's CEO to express my concerns about this collaboration.
T-Mobile's problematic actions extend far beyond this partnership. The company dismantled its diversity, equity, and inclusion program to appease the Trump administration while seeking approval for two major acquisitions. They now host Trump Mobile on their network and lobbied in support of Trump's budget bill—legislation expected to strip millions of Americans of healthcare while delivering tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires. Adding to this troubling record, T-Mobile has spent years employing aggressive union-busting tactics to prevent workers from organizing.
After a month with no reply, I began exploring alternative carriers. It’s important to research that carefully, since other carriers may be owned by T-Mobile directly (like Mint Mobile), or may use the T-Mobile network (like Ultra Mobile and Tello Mobile). To have the greatest impact, it’s best to move to a carrier with no connection to T-Mobile. You can find alternatives here.
After selecting a new carrier, I began moving lines, one by one. I was concerned about how difficult it would be, but it’s surprisingly easy. After moving the last line, the last step was to call T-Mobile and formally terminate my accounts.
Mobile carriers HATE when customers move. It costs money to acquire new subscribers, so they will try very hard to keep you. I explained to the service rep why I was cancelling my contract, and that I had sent a message to the CEO about my concerns. “He’s probably very busy,” the rep said. “Would you wait two more weeks before you cancel?” I explained that I had already waited for a month with no reply. She then offered me a $20 credit for staying. Without being rude, I explained that this wasn’t about money, it was about defending democracy.
If you’re a T-Mobile customer, I strongly encourage you to cancel your T-Mobile contract on the weekend of November 14-16 as thousands join me in boycotting T-Mobile. Even better, you can sign the #BoycottTMobile pledge and actively join us. It’s probably easier than you imagine, and it’s an important step we can take to stop the pipeline that funds Musk and Trump. You’ll be glad you did.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Boycott T-Mobile—and All Trump Collaborators
Let's make it clear not just to T-Mobile but all of corporate America: There are costs to siding with this authoritarian government.
Oct 03, 2025
Ever since the Irish Land League organized community members in County Mayo to band together and refuse to serve, work for, trade with, or even deliver mail to the English land agent, Captain Charles Boycott, the boycott has become a staple in activists’ toolkit. And nearly 160 years since Captain Boycott was effectively ostracized—as US President Donald Trump and his cronies assail American democracy and send troops into our cities and masked goons onto our streets—it's a tool that’s gaining a renewed prominence once again.
After Target dropped its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) targets in February, Black faith leaders, including Pastor Jamal Bryant, called for a boycott of the company. “What we learned from the Montgomery bus boycott is that racist America doesn’t respond to speeches, it responds to dollars,” Pastor Bryant told his parishioners at his 10,000-member megachurch in Atlanta.
In the months that followed, Target’s sales, foot traffic, and stock price tanked. By August, Forbes was announcing that the boycott had cost the Target CEO his job and the company’s investors $12 billion.
After Elon Musk started his attempts to destroy the US government earlier this year, including bragging about putting USAID into the woodchipper, an act that may have killed half-a-million people so far, thousands committed to boycotting Tesla as part of the #TeslaTakedown movement.
If a company like T-Mobile believes that there are no economic consequences to siding with authoritarianism, they are much more likely to do it.
In the midst of the boycott, Tesla sales collapsed, the stock price cratered, and before long Musk was out of the government and engaging in a very public bitching session about President Trump.More recently, after Disney suspended Jimmy Kimmel for comments following the tragic murder of Charlie Kirk, a boycott of Disney grew so rapidly, with tens of thousands of cancellations of Disney, Hulu, and ESPN, that it forced the company into reinstating the comedian.
Attempting to build on this, the labor union, the Communication Workers of America, the Tesla Takedown campaign, and the climate coalition I held lead, Stop the Money Pipeline, have launched the T-Mobile Boycott.
In the fight to save democracy, T-Mobile has chosen the wrong side: It’s hosting Trump Mobile on its network, despite the conflicts of interest being so great they may amount to corruption. T-Mobile is also partnering with Elon Musk’s Starlink, pouring billions into the far-right extremist’s pockets, and it lobbied in favor of Trump’s deadly budget bill, which will strip healthcare from millions of Americans. T-Mobile has also engaged in years of union busting so vicious it recently became the first telecommunications company to be added to the AFL-CIO’s boycott list.
We’ve set a goal of 10,000 T-Mobile customers canceling their contracts between November 14-16. In the process, we hope to build on the energy of the Target, Tesla, and Disney boycotts and make it clear not just to T-Mobile but all of corporate America: There are costs to siding with this authoritarian government.
If you’re a T-Mobile customer, you can take the pledge to hang up on T-Mobile here.
Even if you’re not a customer, we encourage you to take the pledge to boycott T-Mobile. The boycott is happening right before the holiday season, when a lot of people switch carriers—tens of thousands of people pledging to never switch to T-Mobile at this time of year is an important part of the campaign.
But I also want to be honest with you, I don’t know if this campaign will work. While we’re urging people to cancel en masse next month, I recently completed a test run and canceled my contract with T-Mobile and switched to Visible (saving more than $60 on my monthly cell phone bill in the process).
As economically advantageous as it was however, it took me about 45 minutes to switch from T-Mobile, including a call to the company to get a “port out pin.” In the grand scheme of things, 45 minutes isn’t an eternity, but it’s also not nothing. It took me less than four minutes to cancel my Disney+ subscription after Kimmel’s suspension.
I have no idea if we can get 10,000 people to do something that might take them nearly 45 minutes, even if we can convince them it is a small but important act in the fight to save democracy.
But I do know this, in On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the 20th Century, Timothy Snyder’s first lesson was, “Do not obey in advance.” And not only is T-Mobile obeying in advance, it's actively courting the administration, even as the horrors pile up: the attacks on free speech, the naked threats against political opponents, the vanishing of countless human beings into a gulag in El Salvador.
So, in this time of grave peril for this country and the world, let us use our money to build the world we want to see.
From Target to Tesla to T-Mobile, let us boycott the collaborators.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Using Boycotts to Defend Free Speech: This Is Larger Than Jimmy Kimmel
Kimmel isn’t the only voice that’s been targeted for failing to toe the line in the wake of Kirk’s murder, but Kimmel’s firing is the one that’s outraged millions of Americans who aren’t political junkies, so it's the one that offers the best chance to act.
Sep 22, 2025
How can we effectively push back on the Jimmy Kimmel suspension, and its larger threats to free speech? After Charlie Kirk’s shooting, Kimmel posted, “Can we just for one day agree that it is horrible and monstrous to shoot another human?” And sent his family’s “love to the Kirks and to all the children, parents, and innocents who fall victim to senseless gun violence.” But that didn’t seem to matter, because Kimmel also dared to point out that the Trump administration was using the assassination to score political points.
US President Donald Trump had already warned in July that Kimmel should be the next to be fired after Stephen Colbert. After Kimmel spoke out following the assassination, Trump Federal Communications Commission head Brendan Carr threatened to revoke the licenses of stations carrying Kimmel’s show. Nexstar and Sinclair then jumped in saying they wouldn’t air Kimmel’s episodes. And ABC-Disney caved. Vladimir Putin and his oligarchs would be proud.
Hearteningly, Americans are responding with appropriate outrage. The cancellation site of Disney+ streaming service has reportedly crashed from people ending their subscriptions. Conservative-leaning comedians have spoken out. Common Cause has launched a Turn Off Disney campaign and FreePress.Net has started a call-in campaign. Even Republican Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) called it “unbelievably dangerous for government to put itself in the position of saying we’re going to decide what speech we like and what we don’t, and we’re going to threaten to take you off air if we don’t like what you’re saying.”
The question is how to sustain the pushback, which means building the broadest possible coalition of fellow citizens who are outraged, whether or not they love Kimmel’s jokes and stands. And how to coordinate as many organizations as possible working together to promote approaches like:
- Boycotting ABC-Disney, including theme parks, cruises, movies, and streaming and TV channels like Disney+, ESPN, and Hulu. Asking international groups to do the same.
- Boycotting local stations of ABC, NextStar, and Sinclair. This could be particularly valuable given Sinclair’s longtime role demanding that their stations air their right-wing segments and talking points (plus demanding Kimmel donate to Turning Point or Kirk’s family). And Sinclair just backed off under pressure from their earlier announcement to schedule a Charlie Kirk Tribute in Kimmel’s slot. Public protests at the affiliates give people ways to act within their own communities, pressuring them to agree to carry Kimmel again and ask Sinclair to do so nationally. They can also spark general local coverage, along the lines of the Tesla Takedown campaigns.
- Targeting and pressuring station advertisers, both national and local. Local groups can publicly announce targets. People can find the advertisers by watching the local broadcasts. There’s also a crowdsourced map where people can take pictures of TV ads and then upload them with links to which advertiser and which station.
- Promoting all these actions on social media and in every other way. Hashtags circulating include #BoycottDisney, #CancelDisneyABC, #CancelDisneyPlus, #CancelHulu, #BoycottSinclair, and #IstandWithJimmyKimmel. Also here’s a link to related cartoons.
Successful boycotts and corporate campaigns need coalitions that act together and persist. I’m hoping other groups will now coordinate with Freepress.net and Common Cause to do this, and coordinate on common platforms to direct people. For instance, someone launched a boycottdisneyabc.com site with toolkits, templates, and an event page. But it’s not clear which, if any, groups are behind it or are using it. Pushback takes organization, as well as individual people acting.
Kimmel isn’t the only voice that’s been targeted for failing to toe the line in the wake of Kirk’s murder. MSNBC fired Matthew Dowd and the Washington Post fired columnist Karen Attiah. But Kimmel’s firing is the one that’s outraged millions of Americans who aren’t political junkies, so it's the one that offers the best chance to act. Kimmel’s suspension presents both a challenge to democracy, and an opportunity to keep this country one where governments can’t just shut down people who disagree with them.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin to Withhold Disaster Aid from Any State or City That Boycotts Israeli Products
One international relations expert called it "the diametric opposite of America First."
Aug 04, 2025
The Trump administration announced Monday that it will cut off federal natural disaster preparation funding to any state or city that boycotts Israeli products.
According to Reuters, which quoted a statement from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA):
States must certify that they will not cut off "commercial relations specifically with Israeli companies" to receive the money from the Federal Emergency Management Agency according to the agency's terms for grantees.
The condition applies to at least $1.9 billion that states rely on to cover search and rescue equipment, emergency manager salaries, and backup power systems, among other expenses.
The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement is an international attempt to use economic means—including refusing to support Israeli companies—to put pressure on the nation's government to stop human rights abuses toward Palestinians.
BDS has gained momentum in the wake of Israel's current genocidal onslaught against Gaza, which began in 2023. However, it long predates the most recent assault as a method of nonviolent resistance to Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories, which is recognized as illegal under international law.
It is not immediately clear which states would lose disaster funding under the new policy, since none actively boycott Israel. In fact, since 2015, 34 U.S. states have passed anti-BDS laws that take multiple different forms.
Many of these states require public employees and contractors to sign pledges that they will not boycott Israeli products during the term of their contract. Others steer state investments away from funds that do not invest in Israeli companies, stocks, or government bonds.
These laws have been frequently challenged in courts as violations of the First Amendment rights to freedom of speech, assembly, association, and petition. Though some have been struck down in federal courts, the U.S. Supreme Court has continuously declined to rule on their legality.
Though no states actively boycott Israel, some U.S. city councils, including in Portland, Maine; Hamtramck, Michigan; and two California cities, Hayward and Richmond, have passed resolutions divesting from Israeli companies considered "complicit" in the country's attacks on Palestinian rights.
According to FEMA's new policy, these cities and others that may consider adopting similar policies may now lose out on federal funds to prepare for natural disasters.
Critics have noted the irony of the "America First" Trump administration jeopardizing the safety of American citizens on behalf of a foreign country.
Stephen Wertheim, a foreign policy expert at the Carnegie Endowment, described it as "the diametric opposite of America first."
Krystal Ball of the political talk show Breaking Points said, "denying American victims of natural disasters aid if they are insufficiently supportive of Israel" was "absolute insanity."
Gillian Branstetter, a communications director for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)—a leading opponent of anti-BDS laws—joked that the government's policy was now: "If you don't buy Sabra hummus, we will drown your family."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Why the Rest of the World Should Boycott Trump’s America
Trump is effectively boycotting the world by withdrawing from international institutions and violating international norms. The world should return the favor.
Mar 24, 2025
The Trump administration objected so strenuously to a recent speech by South Africa’s ambassador that it expelled him from the United States.
What did Ebrahim Rasool say that was so objectionable? Honestly, the speech he made at a webinar sponsored by a South African research institute was rather boring.
But embedded in his remarks is this observation: “Donald Trump is launching… an assault on incumbency, those who are in power, by mobilizing a supremacism against the incumbency at home.”
Don’t come here, don’t invest here, don’t buy from Tesla or Amazon or any of the other corporations that have kissed Trump’s ring.
This sentence requires a bit of interpretation. The “incumbency” in this case is the federal bureaucracy; the diversity, equity, and Inclusion programs in government and business; anti-racism initiatives more generally; and even elements of the Republican Party that haven’t been Trumpified. “Supremacism,” meanwhile, is white supremacy.
Essentially, the ambassador was pointing out that Trump and MAGA have launched a campaign to advance white supremacy in a country where the civil rights movement achieved enough progress to qualify today as the mainstream.
This isn’t a wild accusation. Among all the racist actions of the current administration, perhaps the most outrageous is Trump’s promise to expedite American citizenship for white Afrikaaners from South Africa that, Trump insists, are experiencing discrimination.
So, while the administration is deporting Black and Brown people by the thousands and trying to claw back birthright citizenship from even more people of color, it is offering to fast-track citizenship for a bunch of white people from Africa. This is not an Onion headline. It’s white nationalism. Even if Afrikaaners were experiencing discrimination in South Africa—which they’re not—privileging their entrance into the United States over Afghans terrified of returning to Taliban rule, Haitians escaping social collapse, or Sudanese fleeing civil war would still count as racist.
Trump’s overtures to the Afrikaaners are also a startling reversion of U.S. policy to the apartheid-friendly positions of the 1980s, when the Reagan administration bucked world opinion by maintaining strong relations with the white minority regime in South Africa. At that time, the anti-apartheid movement in that country was calling on the world to boycott, sanction, and divest from (BDS) South Africa.
Now that a white nationalist has (again) become president of the United States, it’s time to take inspiration from the anti-apartheid movement. As the Trump administration imposes restrictions on travel from 43 countries to the United States, as it slaps tariffs against allies and adversaries alike, as it cozies up to autocrats like Russia’s Vladimir Putin, as it dismantles federal programs designed to help people in need all over the world, as it withdraws from the Paris climate accord and the United Nations Human Rights Council, as it illegally deports thousands of people and sends some of them to horrific prisons in El Salvador, as it voices support for far-right, neo-Nazi political parties, as it threatens to seize Greenland and absorb Canada, it’s time to call on the world to treat this country as a pariah.
András Schiff has just done that. The great pianist announced this week that he has cancelled upcoming engagements and will not perform in the United States. This comes after he has refused to play in Russia and his native Hungary as well. “Maybe it’s a drop in the ocean; I’m not expecting many musicians to follow,” Schiff said. “But it doesn’t matter. It’s for my own conscience. In history, one has to react or not to react.”
Such a boycott should not be a permanent shunning but a specific response to policies that are in clear violation of international law and universal values of democracy and human rights. Yes, the United States has been in violation of such principles in the past. But this time, the Trump administration has crossed so many lines that it threatens to overthrow the very system of international law.
Once the U.S. government abandons its policies of white nationalism, among other unacceptable positions, it can be welcomed back into the community of nations. Until then: Don’t come here, don’t invest here, don’t buy from Tesla or Amazon or any of the other corporations that have kissed Trump’s ring. Trump is effectively boycotting the world by withdrawing from international institutions and violating international norms. The world should return the favor.
Isolating the Trump Administration
The Trump administration’s indiscriminate tariffs have already prompted a number of countries to respond in kind. Canada has imposed $32.8 billion in tariffs against the United States, while Europe has imposed $28 billion worth. China announced a “15% tariff on U.S. coal and liquefied natural gas, along with a 10% tariff on other products, including crude oil, agricultural machinery, and pickup trucks.”
The residents of these regions are also adjusting their travel plans accordingly, a move that Robert Reich recently endorsed. The Washington Post reports:
Canadians are skipping trips to Disney World and music festivals. Europeans are eschewing U.S. national parks, and Chinese travelers are vacationing in Australia instead. International travel to the United States is expected to slide by 5% this year, contributing to a $64 billion shortfall for the travel industry, according to Tourism Economics. The research firm had originally forecast a 9% increase in foreign travel, but revised its estimate late last month to reflect “polarizing Trump Administration policies and rhetoric.”
Trump’s policies are hurting the United States, from the travel industry and research institutes losing federal grants to the average consumer who is paying for all the tariffs through higher prices.
Some observers recommend that other countries resist the temptation to shoot themselves in the feet by imposing penalties of their own. Economist Dani Rodrik, for instance, suggests that retaliatory tariffs will only hurt the countries imposing them, so the best strategy “is to minimize the damage by staying as far from the bully as you can and waiting for him to punch himself out and crumple in a corner.”
Another option, economist Gabriel Zucman urges, is to apply tariffs to U.S. oligarchs: “If Tesla wants to sell cars in Canada and Mexico then Musk himself, as main shareholder of Tesla, should have to pay tax in Canada and Mexico. Put a wealth tax on him, and condition Tesla’s market access to him paying the tax.”
Changing travel plans, slapping tariffs on U.S. goods, taxing U.S. plutocrats: These are all potentially useful strategies. But they don’t go far enough.
Hit the Hornets’ Nest
You’ve heard this advice before: Don’t antagonize him, don’t make him lash out, don’t further endanger those around him. But abusive husbands only continue their unacceptable behavior in the face of such coddling.
Many international leaders hope that they can avoid Trump’s wrath by praising him, treating him to military parades when he visits, or at least laying low in the hopes that he won’t direct his wrath in their direction.
Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy, for instance, has done his best to curry favor with Trump, particularly after the disastrous White House meeting last month. In this way, he was able to restart U.S. military aid and intelligence-sharing. But he’s still on the verge of being sold out at the bargaining table if and when the Trump administration accepts Russia’s hardline terms for a cease-fire and peace deal.
The alliance against fascism worked in World War II. The anti-apartheid movement was successful. Let us now stand against the Trumps and Putins and Netanyahus of the world.
Still, you might object, no country is powerful enough to put Trump in his place. And those that might have a shot at doing so—China, Russia—are more interested in working with Trump to divide the world into spheres of influences.
But that still leaves a lot of countries that can band together, like an army of small and mid-sized Lilliputians to tie down the power-drunk Gulliver. They simply have to hit the United States where it hurts. Don’t buy products from American companies that support Trump. Don’t allow those businesses to invest in your countries. Reorient your currency transactions away from the dollar.
These measures should not come all at once. Rather, they should be staged strategically to force Trump to back down from his most noxious policies. Name-and-shame tactics don’t work with leaders who have no shame. Grab him by the wallet—it’s the only language he understands.
Will such measures hurt ordinary Americans? Probably. But no more than Trump is already hurting us. The tariffs that countries have imposed in retaliation against Trump’s actions will adversely affect nearly 8 million U.S. workers, the majority in counties that voted for him. But these costs are nothing compared to what the world will suffer as a result of Trump’s cuts in foreign assistance, which will likely kill hundreds of thousands of people a year.
One last recommendation: Don’t cut off all communication with the United States.
In the 1980s, the anti-apartheid campaign fostered considerable contact between the United States and South Africa. But it was a relationship based on solidarity between civil society organizations. My dear friends in Canada, Mexico, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Latin America: Please do not equate Trump with the United States. Yes, a lot of people here voted for him. But they are starting to have buyer’s remorse. Let’s join hands across borders and party lines and say, “We will not tolerate racist bullies.”
The alliance against fascism worked in World War II. The anti-apartheid movement was successful. Let us now stand against the Trumps and Putins and Netanyahus of the world. They are the 1%, and they are vastly outnumbered.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy