Editorial Note: Opinions and thoughts are the author’s own and not those of AFROTECH™.
Often, those who rank in seniority get to speak for the broader community. How long does that work though, and how long should it last? It’s a question that comes up whenever someone of a previous generation is asked to speak or is seen as a representative during a current crisis a community is facing. AFROTECH™ previously reported that after Target rolled back its commitments to DEI, the retail store has seen a decline in foot traffic for the past 10 weeks. Target was one of the brands that, in the wake of the murder of George Floyd in 2020, put a lot of time and money towards pushing for racial justice and diversity, equity, and inclusion across the board. After the decline, The New York Post reported that Target CEO Brian Cornell met with Reverend Al Sharpton about its DEI policies, but should Sharpton be the one speaking for us?
Sharpton came to prominence during the 1970s with his focus on civil rights and economic justice for the Black community. His first notable act was advocating on behalf of Tawana Brawley in 1987, when she alleged white men assaulted her. Although the claims were later found to be fabricated, this still had people seeing Sharpton as a vocal advocate for justice. Politically, he has run for the Senate, for mayor of New York, NY, and in 2004, president of the United States. Although he did not win any of these races, it did raise his public profile quite a bit. However, should his past attempts for office and advocacy make him the go-to voice that corporations and organizations seek out when they want to communicate with the greater Black community? No, I believe we need both previous and up-and-coming leaders to be tapped as we navigate Donald Trump’s second term as president. Especially at a time when the institutions that Al Sharpton is most connected to, such as the Black church and its greater community, hold less weight today than before, and over time they have become less representative of the issues younger Black generations care the most about.
Target had both internal and external initiatives that were aimed at the Black community, according to Reuters. REACH, which stood for Racial Equity Action and Change was a program established in 2020 that looked to drive systemic change within the company and had a goal of increasing Black representation across the company by 20% by 2023. It also pledged to externally spend more than $2 billion with Black-owned businesses and created scholarship programs targeting HBCUs, as well as an accelerator aimed at helping Black founders create retail products.
The big retailer did not stop at DEI initiatives with the Black community; it also launched initiatives aimed at the LGBTQ+ community. The company sold Pride merchandise all year-round and enhanced benefits for employees, which included procedures connected to gender affirmation. I believe that the foot traffic decline is not only happening because of the rollbacks on initiatives aimed at Black people, but also the LGBTQ+ community and the intersectional identities that come into play as well.
The first official action against Target was a boycott organized by Jamal Bryant, an Atlanta, GA-based pastor who called for an initial strike of 40 days, as reported by Fox 5 Atlanta. Bryant announced the second phase of the boycott on Easter Sunday, according to Fox 5, after calling on the Black community to give up Target for Lent. In addition, the outlet reports planning for a town hall meeting on Tuesday, April 22, 2025, is in the works to talk about how to move forward. Target’s CEO has also been invited to attend the meeting. I am glad to see that the impact was felt and the movement is continuing because companies do not budge unless you hit them in their pockets.
As it relates to the question of who should be at the table when issues are being discussed, I believe we need diverse viewpoints across ages and industries when looking to build bridges between corporations and institutions and the greater Black community. It is not enough to have civil rights activists at the table when dealing with issues that relate to capitalism. We need people at the table who have a vested interest in seeing more Black people within a certain space because they have stake in a certain industry. What happens often is that companies reach out to those in entertainment or activism when we should instead bring the Black industry leaders into these conversations. They are the ones who can highlight the issues specific to their industry. For example, since Target is a retailer, it could reach out to leaders across retail, consumer packaged goods, beauty, etc, to gather representation. This way the retailer can potentially serve overlapping needs that could benefit wider swaths of Black people and Black professionals. Doing that would mean its efforts could be felt more broadly across the community, which would benefit its business as well as Black people.
What we need to have are more intergenerational issues discussed when talking about Black people’s relationships with corporations and how they should evolve. Often, we see the most visible person of the moment within the Black community getting tapped to speak on things when a leader with a vested interest in the specific industry should be tapped because they have a lot more skin in the game — and awareness of issues and potential solutions they can speak to.
Often, people believe that visibility equals credibility, and that is not the case.
