The primary functions of protest are to publicly signal that a situation is not normal and to act as an incubator for building practical infrastructure, like the carpooling network during the Montgomery bus boycott. It is a gateway to organized, sustained action, not just a performative measure.

Research shows boycotts rarely cause significant stock price declines. Their primary power lies in generating media attention, which pressures corporate leaders to change behavior to protect the company's reputation, rather than its immediate shareholder value.

While public demonstrations build community and raise awareness, they are less feared by power structures than economic withdrawal. In a system driven by consumption and market growth, the most disruptive act an individual can take is not adding their voice to a crowd, but subtracting their money from the economy.

Citing Gandhi and the Civil Rights Movement, the most successful long-term protest strategies rely on peaceful non-resistance. Active resistance, even when justified, often escalates violence and cedes the moral high ground, making it a less effective tool for systemic change compared to disciplined, peaceful protest.

Modern administrations, immune to moral outrage but sensitive to market fluctuations, can be influenced by targeted economic strikes. Mass unsubscriptions from major tech platforms can directly impact the stock market, forcing a political response where traditional protests fail.

In a consumer-driven economy, withdrawing participation by unsubscribing from services sends a powerful market signal. This financial pressure can influence corporate behavior and government policy more effectively than traditional protests or heckling from the sidelines.

Jane Fonda argues that defeating an authoritarian regime requires weakening its "pillars of support" like finance, military, and art. This is achieved through strategic noncompliance—strikes, boycotts, and mass actions that hit the economy—rather than traditional protests, which are less effective against entrenched power.

The swift reversal by Sinclair and Nexstar on blacking out Jimmy Kimmel demonstrates that coordinated economic pressure from consumers and advertisers can be a more effective and rapid check on corporate political maneuvering than traditional political opposition, which often lacks the same immediate financial leverage.

The real leverage in consumer boycotts is not the direct financial hit from cancellations. It's the media narrative about potential impact that creates pressure on employees, partners, and executives, ultimately forcing a corporate response—as seen when Disney reversed course on Jimmy Kimmel.