You're right - "a boycotted corporation can continue to communicate, advertise, etc. in numerous ways."
A business that goes under because of a boycott cannot.
How does a company that no longer exists maintain bank accounts and a social media presence? They literally ceased to exist because no one spent any money on them due to the boycott.
That's not to say the other guy's overall point is correct. He's full of shit. But he's still right about that one thing.
If the business were to go under because of a boycott, you'd essentially be deplatforming them.
Yes, the chances of that actually happening are minuscule, but the point remains.
You're right - "a boycotted corporation can continue to communicate, advertise, etc. in numerous ways." A business that goes under because of a boycott cannot.
That's factually wrong. They still have their social media accounts. They still have their banks.
What are you even implying?
That we cannot choose where to shop and or spend money?
How does a company that no longer exists maintain bank accounts and a social media presence? They literally ceased to exist because no one spent any money on them due to the boycott.
That's not to say the other guy's overall point is correct. He's full of shit. But he's still right about that one thing.
Shill account is obvious. But I'll entertain. The company chose to alienate their customer base. That's whats called a poor buisness decision.
We are allowing them to speak and engage in society. We just aren't engaging back.
How can you equate that to deplatforming conservatives, from social media, banks etc aka not allowing us to engage in society?