|
|
Since some here expressed their anger over Wal-Mart not carrying the morning after pill and being forced to, how do you feel about them being protested into dropping things off their shelves such as Maxim, FHM, Stuff Magazines, and now Brokeback Mountain?
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/702899.html
I dont know what that link was to, something about tornadoes but anyway. DB, this is a free country, if Wal-Mart wants to carry that crap, they should be able to. Just like if they didnt want to carry that crap, they shouldnt have to. If Wal-Mart finds if beneficial to bow to the pressures of protest, then they will. No law maker should get involved in this, just like they shouldnt have gotten involved with the morning after pill debate.Originally Posted by Dawgbitten
I agree. If people don't want to buy it, then they shouldn't worry about, but personally, I would rather have Wal-Mart selling magazines that promote heterosexual sex, than movies promoting homosexual sex.
Crap. wrong link. Let me see if I can find it.
if they don't agree with it, just don't buy it. stores should have the freedom to sell or not sell the products they want (as long as those products are legal). imo, protesting brokeback only serves to enhance its appeal and mystique to the non-religious/non-homophobic crowd. just don't by the movie if you don't agree with it. it's silly, to think that doing this is somehow making a difference for the better. that being said, i rather this to government mandates that a certain product must be sold.
Not saying lawmakers were going to get involved. I just think there are some double standards.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/fool/2006040...l/114417386415
I'm with NV on this one. Some folks act like this is the first movie ever made about dudes who like dudes...nope, it's one in a long line. Sure, it was pushed big time by the hollywood machine, but the overreaction by the politigious (like it, I made it up myself...political/religious) groups has only served to increase the press this movie got and, ultimately, increase it's sales. Seems to me that it was counterproductive to the goal of the politigious sect.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
There are no double standards here. If Wal-Mart is worried about losing a few dollars one way or the other, then they will make a decision to keep it or get rid of it. If they dont care about losing a few dollars, then they will make a decision to keep it or get rid of it. This should be Wal-Mart's decision alone. Do they want to please the conservative whackos, or do they want to please the lefties? Do they want to keep brokeback or take it off of the shelves? I have always thought that it should be Wal-Mart's decision and nothing else. If the people want to protest and pressure Wal-Mart, that is also their right, rahter it be for it or against it. As long as, Brokeback isn't porn or the like, which I assume it isnt, there should be no regulatory issue.
I think Sik-m is right, though. The dumb arses protesting this are just brining attention to something they dont like, which will help Brokeback's cause in the end.
i have a hard time believing that wal-mart is really concerned about boycotts by either of these groups. most people i know would love to boycott wal-mart...but they can't justify it. where else can you get a 12-pack of tighty-whiteys, a birthday cake, and a new set of radial tires while you play the latest xbox360 game. seriously, even if some on the extreme right or left did/do boycott based on whatever decision/nondecision that wal-mart makes, i doubt those couple thousand people would make much of a dent in wal-mart's profit...and these same people would likely forget all about it once it cools down.
Product/business protests and boycotts have been around forever, whether it's from the left or the right. It's rare that they work (but in some cases they have). It's just a way to get attention for these groups.
Let Wal Mart sell what they want to. If you want to boycott them, then go to Target or K-Mart. Sik-m's right, chances are a few thousand boycotters aren't going to take Wal-Mart down.
I agree.
The system works because people only purchase things that they WANT to purchase and from whom they wish to purchase. If I don't like something that a retailer is doing, I go elsewhere. Everyone has the same right. It takes care of itself.
OH, and my opinion, this was the first thing that I have appreciated about WalMart. Good for them!
it doesn't matter how effective it is or whether it is a stupid thing to protest -- if you want to protest something a retailer is doing with an organized boycott, then that is your right. such boycotts have often been successful in the past to get retailers to bow to the will of their customers. this is capitalism at its best and the exact opposite of government intervention. about as far from a double-standard as it gets. if a bunch of people wanted to get together and boycott walmart because of the morning after pill issue, then i say good for them. but our freedom takes a hit every time the government steps in where it does not belong.
Speaking of Stuff magazine, Has anyone seen the recent cover? Stacey Keibler! I didn't have time to pick up a copy and look at all the wonderful photos inside, but the cover was very, very nice! It is a shame that those stiffs at American family group or whatever they call themselves want to boycott this magazine and not allow such beauty to grace those poor Mexican immigrants who shop at Wal-Mart.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
