You can also have friends if you just pay mercenaries to kidnap them from the street at gunpoint. Many many great friends at any time.

You just know that's going to be exhibit 1 for the defense.

Fucking fascist Nazi man baby doesn't like when advertisers do what he tells them, and then continues to do so when he realizes that was a bad idea.

Not if there's fewer there to see ads. They're still a business with a bottom line, even if what they do is terrible.

Nestle has an extremely safe, risk-averse marketing strategy. In part due to their various scandals, they try really hard to be family friendly and boring.

That said, they are not worse than other food and beverage conglomerates.

1. child labor: mars & others were also implicated. These companies were most likely unaware of the child labor being used to harvest cocoa. The way it works is there are wholesalers in Africa who buy cocoa from processing facilities who buy fresh cocoa pods from local farms. These wholesalers advertised themselves as being child-labor-free. The farms they buy from were using child labor. This is a problem with capitalism exploiting people in the global south, causing perverse incentives, and with companies having limited insight into the full depth of their supply chains.

2. water is not a human right: The nestle water exec said the quiet part out loud. But, no beverage company believes water is a human right - they just aren't stupid enough to say that on camera. If they did think it was a human right, they'd be working to ensure universal access to clean water rather than bottling it and shipping it around the world while limiting water access at their extraction points and polluting the water near their factories. Look at what coca cola is doing in mexico - rampant water pollution such that in factory towns Coke is the only safe drink for folks because the water is contaminated. Nestle is bad, but no worse than coca cola.

3. infant formula scandal: this occurred in the 1970s and was obviously awful. Every major multinational food and beverage conglomerate has stories like this if you look hard enough - this just happens to be a fucked up series of events that got some major media play.

People online scapegoat Nestle, but continue to buy electronics and clothing made with child labor, tree nuts/soda/and other products known to be harmful to watersheds, and many other products from companies which harm people in the global south. This isn't meant to defend nestle, but to remind everyone that there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. Nestle is not anywhere close to an uniquely evil company. Not even in its own industry.

In an actual court? In Trumps america?

When people go we may use child slaves in our supply chain, steal and ruin water supplies, and bribe medical professionals to get discourage breastfeeding, but you're too fucked up for us to work with then you know you've fucked up.

Preach. Never do business with a professional troll.

Currently scheduled for 18th of March.

It's harder to laugh it out of court when the plaintiff is in the government himself.

It's not a boycott, neither is it illegal. He's literally just being a crybaby and believes that anybody not pandering to his business model should be forced by the courts to give him money regardless.

Musk is not just supporting Nazis, he is a flaming Nazi himself.

I mean he's being bukaked with publicity.... So if that's his thing?

What I'd like to know, assuming there is still logic and sanity in this world (please it's all I have don't argue) how would a company from this list have avoided this in the first place? Like once you start advertising with a partner like X then you may never stop? Seriously I'm not sure. So maybe just never risk doing business with anyone because you'll be sued into staying in business with them forever? I'm certain it's right in their contracts how and when they can leave, is that in dispute?

Boycotts are absolutely legal, you are completely entitled to decide who you don't want to do business with. However, illegality is no longer required for the justice system to be weaponized against you, and President Musk just wants to make an example to others who might not want to do business with an actual Nazi.

Surely it's up to the advertisers to choose where who they pay money to use?