Hanna Reinikainen, University of Helsinki

Essi Pöyry, University of Helsinki

Jason Weismueller, University of Western Australia

Rory Mulcahy, University of the Sunshine Coast

Politics is growing more divisive and marketers are under increasing pressure to respond. Since early 2025, the socio-political climate has remained highly charged, shaped by geopolitical conflict, authoritarian and populist tendencies, and deepening tensions between states, markets, citizens and households. For marketing scholars and practitioners alike, politics is no longer a background condition. It is an active force shaping marketplace meanings, consumer expectations, corporate communication and brand risk.

The effects of divisive politics are difficult to isolate because politics now extends well beyond formal institutions, elections and state power. It is equally embedded in lifestyles, identity claims, cultural narratives and consumption choices. The concept of lifestyle politics captures how consumers enact politically inflected ways of living in pursuit of social change. As a result, practices once treated as neutral are increasingly interpreted as value-laden and ideological. Brands are therefore scrutinised not only for what they say, but for what they refuse to say.

A growing body of work demonstrates that politics enters marketing and consumption through multiple routes. Research has examined how brands align with sociopolitical causes, how consumers respond emotionally and behaviourally to those efforts, and how political ideology shapes consumer evaluations including food preferences and brand attachment. Other studies have explored how boycotts, buycotts and political consumerism affect marketplace outcomes, while others have traced the rise of far-right consumer culture and resistance to liberal ideals and political correctness in marketing.

Recent work highlights the growing importance of politically engaged intermediaries and digital infrastructures. Social media influencers can mobilise participation in political issues, curate hybrid political-commercial identities, and shape audience responses to contested causes. Online environments facilitate the spread of misinformation, falsehoods and distorted political narratives which, in turn, affect information sharing, opinion formation and contribute to polarisation. Under these conditions, brands may seek silence or neutrality, but silence itself can function as a political signal, carrying its own risks and inviting backlash.

Over the last decade, the Journal of Marketing Management has published work on the politics of community and market transformation, racial dynamics in markets and marketing systems, social movements and consumer culture theory and critical approaches to social marketing. More recent contributions address consumer activism and alternative consumption, ethical and morally reflexive influencer cultures, cancel culture and possibilities for brand forgiveness, the politics embedded in consumer culture theory itself and brand activism under conditions of permacrisis. This Special Issue builds on those conversations while extending them to the broader question of how political forces shape marketing and consumption in an increasingly divisive world.

Important questions remain unresolved. Under what conditions does political engagement enhance rather than erode brand value? Why do some consumers reward political positioning while others respond with resistance, backlash or disengagement? How do algorithmic environments, misinformation and influencer ecologies amplify, refract or distort political signals in the marketplace? How do race, nationalism, populism, anti-DEI criticism and geopolitical conflict reshape legitimacy, inclusion and exclusion across markets?

This Special Issue seeks contributions that examine how political forces enter the marketplace, how they shape consumer responses, and how marketers navigate the opportunities and hazards that follow. Conceptual, theoretical, methodological and empirical work is welcome, including qualitative, quantitative, mixed-method and interdisciplinary research. Submissions that clarify when political engagement creates value, when it deepens polarisation, and when silence or neutrality becomes untenable are particularly encouraged. Submissions from a wide range of cultural and geopolitical contexts are especially welcomed. Traditional text-based manuscripts are welcome, as are alternative representational formats where appropriate and consistent with Journal of Marketing Management policy.

Potential topics

• Political ideologies, identities and lifestyle politics: How do political forces shape consumption choices, brand perceptions, media use and information processing?
• Explicit political stances, silence and neutrality in brand communication: When, why, and how does taking a political stance, or the refusal to engage in such, generate support, scepticism, backlash or disengagement?
• Consumer activism, boycotts, buycotts and cancel culture: How do consumers mobilise for or against brands, and what determines escalation, forgiveness or longer-term market consequences?
• Influencers, creators and political-commercial hybrids: How do influencers, celebrities, and other intermediaries blur the boundaries between promotion, identity politics, advocacy and civic participation?
• Digital platforms, algorithms and misinformation: How do platform design, governance, recommendation systems and mis/disinformation shape exposure to and responses to political marketplace content?
• Race, nationalism, populism and anti-DEI movements: How do contested political projects reshape inclusion, exclusion, legitimacy and representation in markets?
• Ethics, responsibility and governance: What normative, regulatory and strategic questions arise when market actors seek to leverage political issues or influence public discourse?
• Methodological and theoretical innovation: What new concepts, frameworks and methods are needed to study politics in contemporary marketing and consumption?

Timeline

• February 1, 2027: Manuscript deadline

Antonella Cammarota, International University of Monaco

Jessica Vredenburg, Auckland University of Technology

Benjamin Rosenthal, Getulio Vargas Foundation

Brand activism has rapidly evolved from a novel strategy into a mainstream corporate practice, attracting growing scholarly attention across disciplines. While it takes on various forms - such as corporate activism, CEO activism, corporate sociopolitical activism, and corporate social advocacy - these expressions share a common feature: the deliberate entry of companies and top executives into the political sphere. This engagement typically involves public positioning and/or tangible actions on controversial, contested, or polarising socio-political issues. In recent years, brand activism has come to play a crucial role in shaping public discourse, influencing consumer culture, and redefining the boundaries of brand management.

Brands have positioned themselves as prominent players in sociopolitical activism, lending their voices to movements such as Black Lives Matter, Me Too, and Pride. Many have gone further, speaking out on civil rights, endorsing or criticising political candidates, and taking public stands on global conflicts. Their social media channels have become platforms for engaging with some of our time's most contentious and politically charged issues - from abortion and LGBTQIA+ rights to gun control, climate change, and racial justice. These messages are often delivered in emotive, occasionally provocative, tones designed to shape public opinion, ignite debate, and foster prosocial engagement among audiences.

Much of the literature has explored perceived authenticity in brand activism, the influence of political ideology, moral framing, and the types of activist efforts. However, while considerable attention has been paid to corporate strategies and outcomes, far less has been devoted to its social and transformative impacts. In parallel, scholars have begun to examine activism across a broader set of actors and contexts, including non-profit organisations, universities, CEOs, consumers, and influencers. The phenomenon has also been studied within B2B markets, the luxury sector, and from a global perspective, illustrating both the depth and breadth of research in this area.

Recent publications continue to reflect the academic community's sustained interest in brand activism. However, on an empirical level, new directions and emerging manifestations of the phenomenon appear to be unfolding faster than researchers can capture or critically analyse them. This substantive gap highlights a critical limitation: a growing disconnection between certain strands of literature and the evolving complexity of real-world practices, which impairs our ability to fully grasp, interpret, and anticipate the shifting dynamics and implications of brand activism today.

The rise of populism, escalating geopolitical conflicts, and increasing societal polarisation appear to have reshaped the trajectory of brand activism. Since late 2024 and into early 2025, several major U.S. corporations have withdrawn from their commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion, as noted in recent studies. At the same time, many brands have scaled back their activist public visibility, muting their social media presence and removing sociopolitical content, while others have undergone internal restructuring, including leadership changes. Consequently, with the convergence of political, ecological, and humanitarian emergencies, the role of business in advancing social good is again under scrutiny.

In the face of this rapidly changing context, while offering valuable insights, existing literature struggles to capture the evolving dynamics of brand activism. Many studies still rely on well-established theoretical frameworks that may no longer be adequate for interpreting the complexities of the current landscape. Given these recent shifts, there is a pressing need to open new directions for research on brand activism. This moment demands not only a deeper understanding of how the phenomenon is evolving across diverse cultural, geographic, and sectoral contexts, but also providing actionable insights to support organisations navigating increasingly complex and polarised environments. Emerging technologies, growing attention to the Global South, and the rise of new social, political and cultural sensibilities may offer fresh analytical lenses through which brand activism can be critically re-examined and conceptually reimagined.

This Special Issue aims to spark a critical and practice-informed dialogue on the current state of brand activism - exploring whether, how, and why it is changing; uncovering new forces shaping its trajectory; and rethinking the role brands can and should play in contemporary society. We invite contributions that challenge and extend current thinking, including new theoretical frameworks, conceptual innovations, interpretive approaches, and robust empirical studies. Submissions may employ qualitative or quantitative methods, as long as they critically engage with present realities and contribute to a richer understanding of the phenomenon. Our goal is to build a body of knowledge that is both theoretically insightful and practically relevant - capable of keeping pace with the speed, complexity, and volatility of today's socio-political landscape.

Potential topics

• Changes in Brand Activism Strategies – Is brand activism taking a new form? Are we witnessing the rise of less visible, more strategic, or quieter modes of activism? How do activist brands act in the current landscape?
• Emerging Brand Activist Contexts – How, and to what extent, does brand activism manifest across different political, cultural, and geographical contexts? Particular attention is invited to the Global South and emerging markets, where civil liberties, media pluralism, or legal protections for civil rights may be limited or contested.
• Institutional Actors as Activist Agents – What happens when universities, public institutions, public figures, or cultural organisations engage in activist practices? How do these actors influence public discourse, shape political debate, or redefine the boundaries of market responsibility?
• The Transformative Effect of Brand Activism – Can marketing-driven activism lead to lasting social change, or is it ultimately limited to symbolic gestures and market-oriented performance goals?
• International and Transnational Dimensions of Activism – How does activism unfold across national borders, global supply chains, and international institutions? What new conditions arise when brand activism is framed as a systemic, transnational commitment?
• Backlash, Culture War, and Polarisation – How brand activism is affected when social and institutional risks emerge, corporate activism provokes ideological resistance, public fatigue, or consumer boycotts? How has the context of rising populism affected the conditions for brand activism?
• Consumer Activism and Spaces of Expression – Has consumer activism changed? If so, how do activist consumers influence brand strategies, communication, and positioning? How do new forms of digital and/or offline spaces affect how consumer activists express their demands, critiques, or support? Are there changes in the relationships between brands and consumer activists?
• Authenticity and Consumer Activism - How can we critically differentiate between authentic brand activism and opportunistic appropriation of activist discourse? Have consumers' understandings of authentic brand activism changed amid current shifts in the sociocultural context?
• Artificial Intelligence and Activist Contents – How is artificial intelligence transforming the creation, personalisation, and dissemination of activist messages? What ethical, moral, and authenticity-related concerns arise when activism is mediated by machine-created content?
• Shifting Channels of Activist Communication – To what extent has sociopolitical pressure prompted a shift in activist communication from open, accessible platforms - such as social media - to more niche, closed (not public) or offline spaces? What are the implications of this relocation of activism visibility and audience engagement regarding brand activism practices and social impact?
• Activism and the Depoliticisation of Society – What are the potential connections between brand activism and the depoliticisation of society? Does brand activism foster genuine political engagement and collective mobilisation, or does it risk causing activism fatigue, depoliticising conflict and reinforcing dominant ideologies? How can we critically assess the boundaries between symbolic engagement and meaningful transformation?
• Measuring Systemic Impact – How can we assess the broader societal effects of brand activism beyond corporate performance indicators or consumer responses? What critical or participatory methodologies are needed to evaluate systemic change?

Timeline

• September 30, 2026: Manuscript deadline