Should Subway Suffer Because Michael Vick Is “Sportsman of the Year?”
Perhaps Michael Vick was awarded “Sportsman of the Year” by BET because he hasn’t done anything too terrible in the past year. If that’s the case, I would like to make some posthumous awards to people who haven’t done anything bad in a long, long time:
Mother of the Year – Joan Crawford
Humanitarian of the Year – Dr. Joseph Mengele
Peace Prize – Adolph Hitler
Human Rights Award – Idi Amin
Husband of the Year – O.J. Simpson (oops, he’s still in trouble, isn’t he?)
There are two new groups on Facebook, “Boycott Subway for Supporting Michael Vick” and “NO WAY Subway,” both of which protest BET selecting Michael Vick as the reward recipient (or nominating him and allowing him to compete for votes), and Subway’s endorsement of the award. Additionally, bloggers and animal rights aficionados/activists are taking up the cause.
Before anyone says that Subway does not endorse the award, check to see if Subway has yet withdrawn support of BET and its awards, or disavowed Michael Vick. So far, no.
My response is “no more Subway.” I didn’t ask my husband to join the boycott because he often lunches at Subway; there’s one in the store where he works. However, this evening he brought up the idea. So we are now officially boycotting Subway, and will continue to do so as long as they stand behind the “Sportsman of the Year.” The longer Subway takes to respond to this situation, the less likely some folks are to return as customers.
When I announced my boycott a couple of days ago, someone commented that a boycott of Subway would hurt only the local store owners, not the parent company. Yes, it would hurt local store owners, who would then complain to the parent company that is being hurt by bad publicity and a drop in sales.
Follow Technorati