These companies seemingly have no idea what the actual effect of a social media storm actually is. Does it kill your business? Does it spawn the next Chik-Fil-A and double your business (until you fall out of the public eye)?
What makes you think they don't know by now what the effects are? Twitter is 10 years old already. We've seen some pretty good examples of what happens when social media turns against you for ethics and morals. If you think billion dollar companies are still just guessing at this social media thing, I've got a bridge to sell you.
You answered your own question with Chick-fil-a. You may see a short term bump in business due to backlash in either direction, but the long-term effect is always
going to be less people willing to go into your store for reasons unrelated to your product. You are now not only fighting against the quality of your own product but the morals of society.
A smart company knows to stay the fuck away from anyone dumb enough to say the things that would upset anyone in either direction. PR departments weren't invented with the launch of social media, corporations are well aware of the value of public perception.
There is no blame to be placed. They are all technically correct in their actions. The idiot in this situation is the one complaining about it after the fact when he knew and admitted he was going too far in the past. Felix can say whatever he wants when he is representing himself on his own content channel, but when he takes money to represent other brands and businesses he can't complain if they don't like what he says in public. He is either standing up for first amendment rights or he isn't, he doesn't get to pick and choose who gets them.
If what he is saying really isn't "such a big deal" then he should have no problem finding a company willing to take him on now that he isn't working with Disney, right? Wouldn't that be the free-market proving him right if he were actually... right?This comment was edited on Feb 16, 2017, 18:40.