
THIS IS AN OPINION
We'd also like to hear yours.
Tweet us @ArkBusiness or email us
I believe in the economic boycott as a perfectly legitimate, free-market tool for encouraging different corporate behavior. It sometimes even works, although there seem to be a lot more calls for boycotts than subsequent victory celebrations.
A few weeks back, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, reacted to a business decision by Nike by announcing that he was giving up his lifelong patronage of the sportswear company. The hashtag #boycottnike trended on Twitter for a few days. Most astonishing to me, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey ordered his state’s economic development agency to withdraw financial incentives that had been offered as an inducement for Nike to locate a $185 million plant in a Phoenix suburb. The plant was expected to employ 505 people and pay average wages of nearly $50,000 a year.
What was the business decision that was worth potentially alienating a development worth almost $25 million in payroll every year? You know what it was. Nike had begun shipping a shoe with the original 13-star U.S. flag embroidered on the heel but was talked out of the idea by Colin Kaepernick, the football player Nike hired as a spokesman last summer after his kneeling protest during the national anthem made him a political lightning rod — and unemployed.
Kaepernick, who is African American, persuaded Nike that the “Betsy Ross” flag had been co-opted by some white supremacists as a nostalgic symbol of the good ol’ days when black people were slaves. (This was news to me, but I don’t seek out white supremacist progaganda.)
Because this is 2019, outrage was immediate and widespread. It seems there are quite a few Americans who were deeply offended that Nike had decided not to profit from what they consider a patriotic symbol, even if it offended others. The calls to boycott Nike surprised me; if I had given it much thought, I would have figured that Ted Cruz and the like-minded had written off Nike as soon Kaepernick signed on.
Apparently not. Gov. Ducey was photographed wearing Nike sneakers on the Fourth of July — two days after announcing that Arizonans “don’t need to suck up to companies that consciously denigrate our nation’s history.” And Sen. Cruz identified himself as a Nike customer until July 2, months after Kaepernik was hired.
I’ve never been as drawn to symbols as I am to ideas, but I understand that symbols can be very powerful. So it surprised me less that Nike withdrew the flag sneakers than that the idea was ever greenlighted in the first place. I remember that my sons had some T-shirts decorated with flag motifs when they were small, but their involvement in the Boy Scouts exposed me to the U.S. Flag Code and made me much more sensitive to proper flag protocol. For instance, the code says, “The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery,” and “No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform.”
The entire protest seemed entirely emotion-driven. Do we demand that all companies commercialize patriotic symbols or face boycott? Or do we reserve that for companies that change their minds after consulting with a trusted (and wildly successful) endorser who has his finger on the pulse of the customer base? And should government officials inject their opinions into legal marketing decisions by private companies when any harm would be limited to shareholders? Nike’s decision not to sell the Air Max 1 USA hardly compares with Boeing’s decision to make safety equipment an added-price option on the 737 Max.
Nike seems to know its business. After its stock price dropped by a few cents on the day that the recall of the Betsy Ross shoes was announced, it was up by more than 4% as of Wednesday’s close.
When Nike confirmed that it was still going to build in Arizona, Gov. Ducey tweeted out a message of welcome. The city of Goodyear is making good on the tax incentives it offered Nike, but Ducey has not reinstated the $1 million the state planned to hand out.
I find that to be the best part of the resolution: The taxpayers of Arizona aren’t having to give money to a company that is clearly willing to come without it.
Someday maybe Americans will be as outraged by the marketing strategies of the opioid manufacturers as they are about sneakers.
![]() |
Email Gwen Moritz, editor of Arkansas Business, at GMoritz@ABPG.com and follow her on Twitter at @gwenmoritz. |