Full Breakdown
Scott Galloway's "Resist and Unsubscribe" Campaign Targets Big Tech's Influence on Trump
2/13/2026, 6:18:39 AM
Overview of the Campaign
Scott Galloway, a marketing professor at NYU Stern School of Business, has initiated a campaign called "Resist and Unsubscribe," aimed at pressuring President Donald Trump by targeting the revenue streams of major tech companies. Launched in response to aggressive immigration enforcement actions that resulted in civilian casualties, Galloway's campaign encourages Americans to cancel subscriptions with ten identified tech giants, including Amazon, Apple, Meta, OpenAI, and X (formerly Twitter). Galloway argues that these companies have prioritized shareholder value over ethical considerations, enabling Trump's policies.
Key Objectives and Strategy
Galloway's strategy hinges on the belief that Trump is primarily responsive to market forces rather than public outrage or media criticism. He asserts that by reducing subscriber numbers, tech companies will feel financial pressure that could lead them to reconsider their support for Trump's administration. Galloway stated, “The easiest way to maybe save some money and have a really big impact... is to resist and unsubscribe.” He believes that collective action could prompt these companies to align more closely with American values.
Historical Context and Precedents
Galloway cites previous instances where consumer boycotts have influenced corporate behavior, such as the spike in cancellations of Disney+ and Hulu subscriptions following comedian Jimmy Kimmel's temporary suspension. He posits that if enough consumers participate in his campaign, it could lead to significant shifts in corporate policies regarding their relationships with Trump and immigration enforcement.
Criticism of the Campaign
Despite Galloway's confidence, critics argue that boycotts often fail to achieve their intended outcomes. Analysis of past boycotts, such as the American boycott of French wine during the Iraq War and the Goya Foods boycott in 2020, shows that sales typically return to normal levels shortly after the initial outrage subsides. Critics contend that while Galloway's intentions may be noble, the likelihood of widespread participation in his campaign is low, as evidenced by historical patterns of consumer behavior.
Official Responses
The White House has responded to Galloway's campaign by emphasizing its commitment to pro-business policies. A spokesperson stated that “industry leaders frequently reach out to the President because they know they have a pro-business and pro-growth ally in the White House.” This response suggests that the administration views Galloway's campaign as unlikely to disrupt its economic agenda.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
There is a notable discrepancy between Galloway's optimistic outlook on the potential impact of his campaign and the historical evidence suggesting that boycotts rarely lead to substantial changes in consumer behavior or corporate policies. While Galloway believes that a decline in subscriber growth could compel tech leaders to reconsider their positions, critics highlight the consistent failure of similar movements in the past.
Verbatim Quotes
- “This is a coin-operated president,” — Scott Galloway, Marketing Professor
- “I think you have to hit them where they feel it. And that’s in terms of shareholder value and a decline in subscriber growth,” — Scott Galloway
- “Americans overwhelmingly rejected cancel culture when they re-elected President Trump with an Election Day mandate,” — Kush Desai, White House Spokesperson
Galloway's "Resist and Unsubscribe" campaign reflects a growing frustration with the perceived complicity of tech companies in supporting policies that many view as harmful. However, the effectiveness of such a boycott remains uncertain, as historical patterns suggest that consumer outrage may not translate into lasting change.
