Boycott and its Effects: Participation, Attitudes and Polarization With Brands

SUMMARY

The section includes analyses of how the boycott calls made after the protests that started after Ekrem İmamoğlu was detained and arrested were received by Turkish society and who participated in the boycott. It also addresses boycott behavior as a form of protest, boycotts made for political reasons, and polarization through brands:

• Have you ever participated in any of the forms of protest that I will read now in order to criticize a social or political situation or to voice a demand?
• Have you ever boycotted a brand whose products you have for any political reason?
• Which of the following did you do in the nationwide boycott held on Wednesday, April 2?
• Why are you boycotting the brands you are boycotting?
• Are you boycotting any of the following brands/companies?
• Are there any brands/companies that you feel close to?

Boycotting has become a widespread form of protest in Turkish society. Although those who declare that they resort to boycotting as a form of protest do not constitute a majority, brands are effectively being boycotted for political reasons. The prevalence of anti-Israel and anti-government boycott behaviors creates a similarity between different segments of society in terms of participation levels. On the other hand, while the anti-government boycott polarizes society politically and socially, this division is less prevalent in the anti-Israel boycott. The anti-Israel boycott is more widespread than the anti-government boycott, in addition, the brands most frequently cited as being boycotted are those associated with Israel. Participants in these two boycotts constitute two-fifths of society.