Opinion: Retake power, influence from most wealthy with vocal protest
Social media platforms give our voices an outlet for public change. With increased political control by some of America’s most successful public figures, we must pressure them by sending clear but peaceful words of disapproval. Hannah Mesa | Illustration Editor
Get the latest Syracuse news delivered right to your inbox.
Subscribe to our newsletter here.
Following the wave of conservatism hitting Europe and the United States, wealthy individuals with limited, if any, political experience are increasingly being given the power to meddle in political affairs. Amid ongoing changes, it’s easy to feel powerless against dominant individuals who are influencing major decisions and policy shifts.
It’s time to start taking protests seriously. As authors, chairmen of sports teams and technology CEOs shape government policies, verbal rebellion is essential to challenging these dynamics.
It takes only about 3.5% of the population’s participation to trigger serious political change, according to research from Harvard political scientist Erica Chenoweth. Social media’s growing prominence makes it easier than ever to give your voice a platform. When those creating our media begin spreading discriminatory rhetoric, we have to take back control.
By holding companies owned by or linked to wealthy individuals in our government accountable, we can create a means to voice dissent against the effects of their problematic political participation.
For example, controversy sparked over author J.K. Rowling’s post celebrating the United Kingdom Supreme Court ruling that transgender women are not legally women. Rowling posted a photo of herself on X smoking a cigar and holding a cocktail, captioned: “I love it when a plan comes together.”
The author has financially supported a campaign by For Women Scotland, an anti-transgender group that heavily influenced the ruling and initiated legal action against the Scottish government.
Now, Harry Potter fans have become increasingly vocal, calling for a full boycott. They argue Rowling will continue to earn millions in profit — funds she has already used to back the court’s ruling.
By failing to consume Rowling’s work, we’re inhibiting her ability to further promote and finance her anti-trans agenda. We have the power to shift her environment from one that tolerates her prejudice to one that holds her accountable, where the consequences and public commentary become impossible to ignore.
Rowling’s wealth shouldn’t grant her the power to influence major policy changes, especially when so many without her status are excluded from the conversation.
Similarly, President Donald Trump’s new administration has appointed at least a dozen billionaires to assist in running the federal government.
The world’s richest man — Elon Musk — has gained significant influence in the new administration, leading the newly established advisory body, the Department for Government Efficiency. Musk has been responsible for cutting U.S. spending and jobs.
His opponents have staged protests at Tesla showrooms in the U.S. and in Europe. He has now pledged to cut back his role in the U.S. government after the electric car firm reported a huge drop in profit and sales at the start of 2025.
This boycott of Tesla is credited with Musk’s decline, but it was ultimately the public’s physical and direct involvement that made it happen. A consistent effort to speak out will only continue to reduce consumer and public support for the company and Musk.
Sophia Burke | Digital Design Director
On April 29, the Senate confirmed another billionaire, Tilman Fertitta, as the upper chamber to be Trump’s ambassador to Italy and San Marino. Though stepping down as chairman of Landry’s Inc., a large hospitality conglomerate, he’ll remain the owner of the Houston Rockets basketball team.
In 2020, controversy arose after rumours surfaced that several players wanted to be off the team due to Fertitta’s strong Republican affiliations and political donations, The New York Post reported.
The players’ decision to request trade had tangible and potentially even financial consequences. It sent a clear message that political accountability matters, and when public figures speak out, their actions carry weight and impact reputations.
There’s a clear correlation between those who own conglomerates and those making major political decisions because, increasingly, it’s the same people. Wealth has become a means to gain political influence, and consumers have the power to debilitate it.
Verbal rebellion and boycotting should continue to extend to private companies using Trump’s rollback of DEIA initiatives to justify their own internal regressions. By February, a number of companies, such as Meta, Amazon, Walmart and McDonald’s, had already changed or ended their DEIA programs.
It’s no coincidence that many of these companies had already faced several boycotts over labor practices, as well as environmental and ethical concerns.
After Target announced its own rollback of DEIA, customer traffic at Target stores saw a significant decline for 10 weeks. Bryant, a pastor near Atlanta, led a 40-day boycott of Target and told CNN that over 200,000 people took part.
A recent meeting between Target’s CEO and activist Rev. Al Sharpton to address backlash over DEIA cuts proves that the company is already responding to protests.
By putting pressure on their profits, consistent and focused protests can allow us to send clear messages of disapproval.
As political uncertainty rises, it’s important for your beliefs to materialize into tangible action. We have the ability to create real change by acting on our principles, especially as today’s climate demands urgency.
The key here is recognizing how a privileged minority and verbal protest shape our government. Most of us can hardly relate to them, yet we continue to finance their influence through our everyday consumption and silence.
On the other hand, when we continue funding these individuals and their companies, we’re also supporting the very policies that harm and disadvantage the majority. Every time we stay silent, and every dollar we spend on the companies they own, becomes a nod of approval until our lack of action results in moral complicity.
Isabel Melendez-Rivera is a junior magazine, news and digital journalism major. She can be reached at iamelend@g.syr.edu.
