3 ms·

In Belarus, state TV has turned into a full-time factory of violent, dehumanizing programming used to justify the torture and human rights violations committed

In Belarus, state TV has turned into a full-time factory of violent, dehumanizing programming used to justify the torture and human rights violations committed against those who oppose Belarusian dictator Alexander Lukashenko. And the biggest advertisers whose funding enables it all? Western companies like Coca-Cola, Nestle, Colgate, Pepsi, and Procter & Gamble.

mdp2021 5y ago
A bit more precisely or clearly: «head of Libereco in Germany Marco Fieber. “The fact that global brands like Procter & Gamble, Mars, Henkel, Coca-Cola or PepsiCo continue to advertise on the dictator’s propaganda channels is a scandal.” // When the Associated Press asked Nestle for comment, the food and drink company replied in a statement, “As a matter of principle, we do not position ourselves along political lines in the countries where we operate, and we comply with all applicable laws and sanctions.” Nestle also announced that it had “significantly reduced” its advertising budget for Belarus.» «[...] far-right media outlets in America have seen their advertising ranks thin considerably. // The same should happen today. Coca-Cola, Procter & Gamble, Pepsi, Mars, and more, are apparently funding full-on propaganda that elevates and protects a violent authoritarian regime, assisting it in declaring enemies of the state and deeming ordinary people inhuman garbage worthy of repression. It needs to be untenable for these brands to advertise on state-owned Belarusian networks» I am not sure advertising in this context is an enabler - probably a facilitator (and this is clearly not pedantic - responsibilities vary). A propaganda machine that needs advertisers to exist does not sound like a sound concept. Still, one could wonder if at the meeting table of any advertiser the embarrassment intrinsic in the situation was perceived and brought to topic. Also, in the theoretical context, in decision making, of the quantitative loss following the embarrassment - that "Ford Pinto" factor that is sometimes forgotten. -- Edit: not bad, this *The National Interest". And quite a useful RSS with it. Thanks.

mdp2021 5y ago

A bit more precisely or clearly: «head of Libereco in Germany Marco Fieber. “The fact that global brands like Procter & Gamble, Mars, Henkel, Coca-Cola or PepsiCo continue to advertise on the dictator’s propaganda channels is a scandal.” // When the Associated Press asked Nestle for comment, the food and drink company replied in a statement, “As a matter of principle, we do not position ourselves along political lines in the countries where we operate, and we comply with all applicable laws and sanctions.” Nestle also announced that it had “significantly reduced” its advertising budget for Belarus.» «[...] far-right media outlets in America have seen their advertising ranks thin considerably. // The same should happen today. Coca-Cola, Procter & Gamble, Pepsi, Mars, and more, are apparently funding full-on propaganda that elevates and protects a violent authoritarian regime, assisting it in declaring enemies of the state and deeming ordinary people inhuman garbage worthy of repression. It needs to be untenable for these brands to advertise on state-owned Belarusian networks» I am not sure advertising in this context is an enabler - probably a facilitator (and this is clearly not pedantic - responsibilities vary). A propaganda machine that needs advertisers to exist does not sound like a sound concept. Still, one could wonder if at the meeting table of any advertiser the embarrassment intrinsic in the situation was perceived and brought to topic. Also, in the theoretical context, in decision making, of the quantitative loss following the embarrassment - that "Ford Pinto" factor that is sometimes forgotten. -- Edit: not bad, this *The National Interest". And quite a useful RSS with it. Thanks.