The Collapse of the Woke Movement is Not Trump’s Fault, but That of Companies

Last week, the announcement by Meta’s owner Mark Zuckerberg regarding the abolition of fact-checkers, as well as initiatives related to DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion), resonated loudly, while American and global media covered the decisions of other large corporations that have embraced the latest trend, anti-woke, as it has been termed. Walmart, Lowe’s, Harley-Davidson, Amazon, Jack Daniel’s, and McDonald’s are just some of the companies that have announced their withdrawal from inclusive hiring programs and anti-discrimination policies, with some even opting out of participating in events that, as stated in their press releases, are not ‘business-related’, such as LGBTQ+ parades, and their sponsorship. CBS News reported that a group of lawyers sent an open letter to Walmart warning that the withdrawal from DEI could have far-reaching consequences.

– Inclusion, equality, and inclusivity are key tools that prevent discrimination and address historical injustices suffered by marginalized groups and minorities. Large companies that withdraw from these commitments signal to smaller ones that it is acceptable to do the same, which will negatively impact all of America – warned the lawyers. Despite the fact that the abolition of DEI-related initiatives is a civilizational step backward, and all previous efforts regarding the engagement and employment of women, members of the LGBTQ+ community, minorities, and others are thrown to the wind, companies seem indifferent to this. They have decided to follow the example of the new president, Donald Trump, who ‘loves America and capitalism’ and wants to improve the profitability of corporate America at any cost, yielding to the pressures of a conservative audience by rejecting the woke ideology they despise. During 2020 and the famous Black Lives Matter movement, American brands tried their best to prove their progressiveness, but now they have decided to make a sharp right turn and reject the phrase go woke or go broke.

Everything revolves around profit

Recently, the Financial Times wrote about the magaization of the American market, claiming that some financiers and bankers finally breathed a sigh of relief with Trump’s arrival because they no longer have to forcibly accept the woke doctrine, nor censor their own expression, worrying about whether they have inadvertently offended women, colleagues, the disabled, minorities…

– I feel liberated. Now I can say pič**ca or retard without fear of being reported. A new dawn has begun – said a top manager to the Financial Times, while brokers on Wall Street explained that it is now easier for them: they do not have to kiss anyone’s ass, they can openly pursue profit, and not worry about some higher social goals. Of course, when the head of America is a man known, among other things, for the statement Grab ’em by the pussy!, it is clear that some will experience catharsis, the stress of universal correctness is easing, they are finally free, but for the new conservative policies and the growing trend of neglecting social goals, one should not blame (only) Trump but also the corporations themselves.

Simply put, in the same way that they are now, finally liberated from the pressure of inclusivity, chasing profit, they were doing the same before; the only difference is in the banner (anti-woke vs. woke). As marketing and equality expert Gillian Oakenfull recently wrote in a Forbes column, the collapse of DEI does not only testify to the strength of conservatives and Trump’s like-minded individuals, nor to the shortcomings of these initiatives, but teaches marketers about the dangers of oversimplifying complex problems. Namely, marketing activities have actually condemned DEI to failure because they promised too much and delivered too little, and in this way, they unconsciously highlighted its limitations, making it vulnerable to criticism, ultimately leading to its downfall.

It has been shown that DEI is just a PR trick, a word that boasts but does nothing. And this has begun to irritate the audience, but also the employees themselves – who are actually the audience. Specifically, Oakenfull notes that 75 percent of companies conducted training on unconscious biases as part of DEI, but only 25 percent achieved any measurable progress.

Following the trend for the sake of the trend

Such initiatives, set as a moral imperative, did not have a clear return on investment, meaning it is unclear how much they truly affected productivity, employee satisfaction, revenue growth, or innovation. Therefore, they have become an easy target in a world of economic uncertainty, in times when it is necessary to tighten the belt.

Now, when it comes to the wider audience, not just corporations, inclusive or, if you will, woke policies have been presented either clumsily (let’s remember Pepsi’s campaign for Black Lives Matter featuring, as they called her, privileged white woman Kendal Jenner) or in a way that irritates part of the audience, especially conservatives, who felt ‘raped’ by inclusive advertisements (the Bud Light scandal with a transgender influencer is a good example of this backlash from the conservative audience). Given that woke was a trend and a guarantee of profit, because go woke or go broke, companies forcibly included it in their marketing campaigns, which only revealed the inauthenticity and some kind of disconnection between corporate intentions and the needs of the audience they were addressing. Oakenfull points out that companies often reduced complex social goals to easily digestible slogans, and due to this simplification and the attitude ‘where everyone goes, so does little woke Mujo’, the audience got the impression that DEI-related initiatives were actually very superficial, almost insignificant, an imposed form without content. These campaigns, therefore, ignored the nuances of the struggle for inclusivity, triggered a wave of skepticism, but also fatigue among the wider audience and employees. For instance, Starbucks awkwardly launched the ‘Race Together’ campaign in 2015, where baristas had to discuss race and racial discrimination with customers. The campaign was, of course, criticized as performative and naive. By focusing only on that superficial level, marketers missed the opportunity to truly respond to the functional, emotional, and social needs of their target groups.

A good idea, poor execution

The collapse of DEI, the columnist concludes, was not inevitable, but it was predictable. Structural weaknesses and poorly executed marketing turned a promising idea into something polarizing and actually ineffective. For marketing professionals, this is a moment of facing the consequences: not only to avoid the mistakes of DEI but also to redefine how companies approach social challenges.

– A step forward is not in abandoning the ideals behind DEI, but in their evolution, transforming them into ideas that have a real impact. This change is crucial not only for connecting with consumers but also for creating jobs and communities where everyone can thrive – said Gillian Oakenfull.

The Financial Times, in its article about MAGA’s corporate America, noted that it is unclear whether the conservative turn will last as long as the progressive one, which became mainstream during 2020.

In any case, even if companies realize how unsustainable it is in these modern times to exclude a huge part of the audience from the narrative and turn only to conservatives and anti-wokers, the question is whether these moves have long-term harmed their brand, or whether the audience will truly believe in the narrative that they care about it, and not about profit. Or, as the Financial Times concludes, the writer Maya Angelou long ago said that people, when they show you who they are, should be believed. Likewise, when companies show you who they are, believe them. The ease with which they discarded DEI, no matter how structurally flawed the initiatives related to it were, speaks to who they truly are. And that has nothing to do with Trump.