Exposing the Grift: Go Woke Go Broke

[IDGETKTFO]

No

 

[deviake]

Not only do you not know who shops there, you've apparently never been in one or seen one of their commercials. Their Target demographic ain't exactly anti-rainbow conservatives, you should be able to reason that with a modicum of common sense.

When conservatives boycotted Target in 2016, Target's sales actually when up when they backed the rainbow lol. You're a joke.

 

[TryggeTryggvar]

`

I didn't read your post nor this one, just a gentle skim. After you've been on a cockfighting website for a couple decades you learn to manage your attention

I give your concession 2/10 ostriches. Head not buried firmly in the sand, tho Ill give you a bonus point for being snarky.

I'm talking about museums. What's wrong with an exhibit om slavery in one?

Nothing is wrong with that, wich you would know if you actually read my posts. In fact, slavery belongs in museums, not in modern public debate, as its an historical event, not a contemporary one.

But keep up the statues em I riot?

I dont know if you are a riot, is that like one of those modern genders the kids keep yapping about?

If you are wondering if I am in favor of a mob tearing down statues, then no. We live in a modern society, having mobbs of people enacting their will with no oversight is not a thing to be celebrated. Quite the opposite, as it sets a dangerous precedence.

Petition for the statues to be moved, then they can gather dust in some museum, to be brought out in an exhibition relevant to what the statue represents.

 

[avenue94]

Nothing is wrong with that, wich you would know if you actually read my posts. In fact, slavery belongs in museums, not in modern public debate, as its an historical event, not a contemporary one.
.

That's why my post was on, keeping it in museums, which Trumpers now don't want. As for modern debate, that's a different ball of wax.

Way to not read the post I responded to originally before hearing the siren call of culture wars.

 

[IDGETKTFO]

Not only do you not know who shops there, you've apparently never been in one or seen one of their commercials. Their Target demographic ain't exactly anti-rainbow conservatives, you should be able to reason that with a modicum of common sense.

When conservatives boycotted Target in 2016, Target's sales actually when up when they backed the rainbow lol. You're a joke.

 

[deviake]

I'm super mad that goofs think Target's demographic is conservatives

 

[IDGETKTFO]

I'm super mad that goofs think Target's demographic is conservatives

Do you work there or something? If not, relax, its just a department store ffs.

 

[deviake]

Do you work there or something? If not, relax, its just a department store ffs.

It's genuinely funny that someone would think Target shoppers are anti-rainbow culture warriors. It's like saying there will be less hunting licenses issued because vegans are boycotting hunting, but probably even dumber

 

[TryggeTryggvar]

Do you seriously think slavery will be gone from all museums in america? If so, I got a wonderfull bridge to sell you.

Also im pretty sure most americans agree with me.

edit - wups forgot to insert the quote, oh well.

 

[TryggeTryggvar]

That's why my post was on, keeping it in museums, which Trumpers now don't want. As for modern debate, that's a different ball of wax.

Way to not read the post I responded to originally before hearing the siren call of culture wars.

There we go, see my above post.

And also, you quoted me first einstein, unless you are also that deviake guy.

 

[avenue94]

There we go, see my above post.

And also, you quoted me first einstein, unless you are also that deviake guy.

Let me rephrase. You jumped into a discussion of whether to showcase history in museums by claiming we should move on, except in museums. AKA you didn't read what you commented about.

 

[Kingz]

I’ve noticed a lot of write ups on this Cracker Barrel saga trying to credit the left for Target’s woes lol. Get real. The left hasn’t had a successful boycott in a few years.

Their best bet is fluffing themselves to look bigger than they are with mainstream media help and getting companies to cave before there is any evidence there is a groundswell for a viable boycott. That was their successful go to for years. But the right started finally organizing a bit better after for ages struggling to do boycotts. And thumbing your nose at the left is of itself a good marketing move.

The fact that Target won’t be flocking back to their DEI programs and tuck friendly bikinis or whatever tells you all you need to know about who Target believes shot them.

They tried that with Bud Light too. “Many progressives are now boycotting the brand because they didn’t stand by Mulvaney”. Yeah no. Completely irrelevant

 

[SuperAlly]

Again for those slow on the uptake, this highlights why for example Wicked and Barbie are not examples of Go woke go broke

Taking stuff already for girls and continuing on that trend, especially with massively successful female IPs like barbie will of course still appeal to women

An example of go woke, go broke is taking an IP massively popular with men and geeks and trying to make it some feminist empowerment and sexuality driven woke nonsense

And it's why Disney have destroyed marvel and star wars

As one comment says on this video, its like hiring a vegan to re do the menu for a steak house and then wondering why the customers left

 

[Contempt]

Again for those slow on the uptake, this highlights why for example Wicked and Barbie are not examples of Go woke go broke

Taking stuff already for girls and continuing on that trend, especially with massively successful female IPs like barbie will of course still appeal to women

An example of go woke, go broke is taking an IP massively popular with men and geeks and trying to make it some feminist empowerment and sexuality driven woke nonsense

And it's why Disney have destroyed marvel and star wars

As one comment says on this video, its like hiring a vegan to re do the menu for a steak house and then wondering why the customers left

"As one comment says on this video, its like hiring a vegan to re do the menu for a steak house and then wondering why the customers left..."

I've had this conversation with some female friends and asked them... "If for over a decade, they decided to start injecting guns, fights, violence and naked women into all the romantic comedies that you loved, in an effort to pander to men... do you think that women would still continue to watch them?

Their answer was... "Of course not, that's not we want to watch."

How the fuck is ANYONE struggling with this concept?

 

[Soggust]

I’ve noticed a lot of write ups on this Cracker Barrel saga trying to credit the left for Target’s woes lol. Get real. The left hasn’t had a successful boycott in a few years.

Their best bet is fluffing themselves to look bigger than they are with mainstream media help and getting companies to cave before there is any evidence there is a groundswell for a viable boycott. That was their successful go to for years. But the right started finally organizing a bit better after for ages struggling to do boycotts. And thumbing your nose at the left is of itself a good marketing move.

The fact that Target won’t be flocking back to their DEI programs and tuck friendly bikinis or whatever tells you all you need to know about who Target believes shot them.

They tried that with Bud Light too. “Many progressives are now boycotting the brand because they didn’t stand by Mulvaney”. Yeah no. Completely irrelevant

I haven't researched it much but what's the deal about Cracker Barrel?

NGL, I like the new logo better, even if it's basic, bc I think the old one was dated, ugly and dogshit anyway.

Legitimately asking because it kinda sounds like a woke political debate like Aunt Jemima but when I search it, it's mostly seems like people just upset about nostalgia?

 

[Fox by the Sea]

Looks like Sydney Sweeney brought back the hot blonde at the center of advertisement.
Absolute miracle, goddamn.
We're winning.

 

[Kingz]

I haven't researched it much but what's the deal about Cracker Barrel?

NGL, I like the new logo better, even if it's basic, bc I think the old one was dated, ugly and dogshit anyway.

Legitimately asking because it kinda sounds like a woke political debate like Aunt Jemima but when I search it, it's mostly seems like people just upset about nostalgia?

A lot of it is nostalgia. But Cracker Barrel has always been about nostalgia. Nostalgia is to Cracker Barrel what animatronic animals and ball pits are to Chuck E Cheese.

I don’t think it’s just the logo. Mostly a culmination of moves they have made over the last couple of years leading up to the logo change. Which was the final straw.

Like stripping down the interior decor until something more generic and sterile.

The company being front and center sponsoring all these “collectives” for just about any woke thing you can think of.

All of this being down by a northeastern liberal woman who likely would never be caught dead in a Cracker Barrel.

However, what I believe is the root of it all is the language these CEO’s use when explaining wholesale marketing strategies and aesthetic changes. They treat their current customers as old hat. Either taken for granted or “they won’t matter in the future”

The don’t have the skill to talk about “wanting to take this brand into the future” without making it sound like they view their current customers as the past or not part of the future. That they are either a dying breed or so out of step that you can’t reach other customers while still considering them. Deep down it’s the talk of erasure. But a boycott isn’t going to get that phycological so the logo becomes the perfect symbol for all that is wrong with the company considering everything else.

I think the Bud Light controversy went to 11 for the same reason. Mulvaney was reviled more than most, no doubt. But they could’ve weathered that by doing any number of things. Alissa Heinershieds podcast appearance blew that out of the water. Where not only did she use the same language about future and past. She was a little more on the nose and pretty much insulted the entire image of a current day Bud Light drinker. She wanted to “move away” from that.

Makes me wonder how they get these jobs. My guess is their skill is based on how they perform during group Zoom calls because they’re shit at presenting their ideas to the public without setting off landmines.

 

[Soggust]

A lot of it is nostalgia. But Cracker Barrel has always been about nostalgia. Nostalgia is to Cracker Barrel what animatronic animals and ball pits are to Chuck E Cheese.

I don’t think it’s just the logo. Mostly a culmination of moves they have made over the last couple of years leading up to the logo change. Which was the final straw.

Like stripping down the interior decor until something more generic and sterile.

The company being front and center sponsoring all these “collectives” for just about any woke thing you can think of.

All of this being down by a northeastern liberal woman who likely would never be caught dead in a Cracker Barrel.

However, what I believe is the root of it all is the language these CEO’s use when explaining wholesale marketing strategies and aesthetic changes. They treat their current customers as old hat. Either taken for granted or “they won’t matter in the future”

The don’t have the skill to talk about “wanting to take this brand into the future” without making it sound like they view their current customers as the past or not part of the future. That they are either a dying breed or so out of step that you can’t reach other customers while still considering them. Deep down it’s the talk of erasure. But a boycott isn’t going to get that phycological so the logo becomes the perfect symbol for all that is wrong with the company considering everything else.

I think the Bud Light controversy went to 11 for the same reason. Mulvaney was reviled more than most, no doubt. But they could’ve weathered that by doing any number of things. Alissa Heinershieds podcast appearance blew that out of the water. Where not only did she use the same language about future and past. She was a little more on the nose and pretty much insulted the entire image of a current day Bud Light drinker. She wanted to “move away” from that.

Makes me wonder how they get these jobs. My guess is their skill is based on how they perform during group Zoom calls because they’re shit at presenting their ideas to the public without setting off landmines.

Right on, really appreciate the explanation.

Since posting yesterday, I actually saw the interior changes (i had only seen the logo) and I kinda understand the backlash a bit more. I don't know the CEO or her political positions, but if she's got a history of liberal positions, then I can also understand why this has become more partisan than simply a bad revitalization.

It is nicer, cleaner, and if any place needed a revitalization, it was CB imo - but that could also just be my preconceived hatred towards anything hickville/white trash.

I can agree, however, making it look like every other generic bs kitchen nightmares revitalization is just not as popular in 2025 as it was maybe 10-15 years ago.

 

[deviake]

The new Cracker logo is trash but the outrage amuses me. Never been in a Cracker Barrel, I assume it's underdoing the same sterile, corporatization as every other major chain. It's probably just woke or something though

 

[avenue94]

A lot of it is nostalgia. But Cracker Barrel has always been about nostalgia. Nostalgia is to Cracker Barrel what animatronic animals and ball pits are to Chuck E Cheese.

I don’t think it’s just the logo. Mostly a culmination of moves they have made over the last couple of years leading up to the logo change. Which was the final straw.

Like stripping down the interior decor until something more generic and sterile.

The company being front and center sponsoring all these “collectives” for just about any woke thing you can think of.

All of this being down by a northeastern liberal woman who likely would never be caught dead in a Cracker Barrel.

However, what I believe is the root of it all is the language these CEO’s use when explaining wholesale marketing strategies and aesthetic changes. They treat their current customers as old hat. Either taken for granted or “they won’t matter in the future”

The don’t have the skill to talk about “wanting to take this brand into the future” without making it sound like they view their current customers as the past or not part of the future. That they are either a dying breed or so out of step that you can’t reach other customers while still considering them. Deep down it’s the talk of erasure. But a boycott isn’t going to get that phycological so the logo becomes the perfect symbol for all that is wrong with the company considering everything else.

I think the Bud Light controversy went to 11 for the same reason. Mulvaney was reviled more than most, no doubt. But they could’ve weathered that by doing any number of things. Alissa Heinershieds podcast appearance blew that out of the water. Where not only did she use the same language about future and past. She was a little more on the nose and pretty much insulted the entire image of a current day Bud Light drinker. She wanted to “move away” from that.

Makes me wonder how they get these jobs. My guess is their skill is based on how they perform during group Zoom calls because they’re shit at presenting their ideas to the public without setting off landmines.

How is any of this going woke? Chains update their design language and interiors all the time, for better or worse. Consumer tastes are always changing, and no one wants to be stuck with a dying customer base.

For that matter, every major company overhauls their stuff semi-regularly, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. This just seems like griping for the sake of griping.