The reason the Guardian now uses "linked to" instead of "responsible for" (which Oxfam used half a decade ago and got ridiculed for years for) is precisely beca

The reason the Guardian now uses "linked to" instead of "responsible for" (which Oxfam used half a decade ago and got ridiculed for years for) is precisely because of what you call "whataboutism" (which it really isn't). Your reply uses a strawman, the argument has never been that a company has less influence than a single customer. The argument is that a company is very often (unless it is a complete monopoly over a non-substitutable good) not as powerful as the consumers (as a group). Companies can do some of the work, but the only reason they're not going bankrupt is because millions of consumers tell them everyday "we need your products, we don't want to change our behavior".