What Exactly Constitutes American History?

It’s a simple question that seems to continually get harder to answer.

Arlington National Cemetery’s Erasure of History

As part of the revisited DEI directive brought on by the White House, Arlington National Cemetery’s website scrubbed various pages, lists, and maps on grave sites that highlighted the specific efforts of African American, Hispanic American, and women service members who are buried on the grounds.

Arlington calls them modules—featured stories for visitors, families, researchers, and educators that help guide walking tours and learning opportunities.

The affected pages were “unpublished,” but it’s unclear if or when the pages will be republished.

The Military Is Diverse By Design

When it comes to cultural diversity at scale, the American military may be the most diverse organization in the United States. Of the just over two million Americans serving, 17% of the force is Black, 17% is Hispanic/Latino, and nearly one-fifth is women, a number that has increased as more military specialties have become fully integrated by gender.

That is today’s reality.

Where Do We Go From Here?

As the narrative around DEI becomes more a part of the cultural zeitgeist, an interesting question is being raised: Will Black history and Hispanic history continue to be classified under DEI and thus need to be removed, to align with the “mandates, policies, programs, preferences and activities in the federal government”? Or is it time we communicate that we’re integrating all history into American history?

Morgan Freeman’s Commentary

Morgan Freeman famously said in reference to Black History Month, “I detest it, the mere idea of it. You are going to give me the shortest month in a year? And you are going to celebrate ‘my’ history?! This whole idea makes my teeth itch. It’s not right.”

A Call to Action

At what point does America define Americans without the need for dual terms such as “Hispanic American” and “African American”? I think it’s important to continue honoring these veterans by sharing their stories and what they believed.

At this moment, perhaps more than ever, we should collectively refer to trailblazing Americans as simply Americans, and honor them by highlighting their achievements. Instead of scrubbing ethnicity out of it, let’s put into action the vision of what a fully integrated America can be for those still living—and for all the veterans who came before us.

Conclusion

It’s time we stop erasing history and instead, integrate it into the fabric of American culture. By doing so, we can create a more inclusive and accurate representation of our nation’s past and present.

FAQs

Q: What is DEI?

A: DEI stands for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. It refers to the efforts to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion in various aspects of society, including education, employment, and government.

Q: Why is DEI important?

A: DEI is important because it helps to promote a more inclusive and equitable society, where everyone has the opportunity to succeed and reach their full potential.

Q: What is the impact of DEI on American history?

A: The impact of DEI on American history is that it can erase or downplay the contributions and achievements of certain groups, such as African Americans and Hispanic Americans, in favor of a more homogenous narrative.

Bevölgy

There is strength in numbers.

As some of America’s biggest and most recognizable companies, CEOs, and boards of directors continue to speak out for and against certain social and geopolitical issues, particularly DEI, consumers have begun to draw their own conclusions about how these actions will affect them and their families.

The result is a call for "economic boycotts" or "fasts" as changes in consumer behavior are designed to hit companies where it counts: the bottom line.

While most of the numbers are still coming in, some of the data is beginning to provide a sneak peek at trends—and get us a little closer to being able to answer the question: Do boycotts still work in 2025?

Target And Tesla Are At The Center

The two most visible boycotts are aimed at Target and Tesla, but the reasons vary.

Target, one of America’s largest retailers with over 1,950 stores, has been omnipresent in the news recently for its January decision to change its DEI policy and practices around both supplier diversity, which they renamed "supplier engagement," and for its decision to "sunset" (the latest corporate lingo for shut down) its Racial Equity Action and Change initiatives. Both of these shifts signaled it would be changing its investment and priority in diversity efforts, which the company has been vocal about in the past, particularly around black-owned businesses, where it committed to $2 billion in spend.

Soon thereafter, a movement began growing on social media, calling for an economic blackout day on Feb. 28 against Target, alongside other retailers who made similar DEI changes. On that day, Target’s website traffic was down 9% compared with the same period last year.

In the background, Pastor Jamal Bryant launched TargetFast.org, calling on 100,000 conscientious citizens to fast from spending any money at Target for the 40 days of Lent, beginning Wednesday, March 5. He’s also asking individuals to sell any Target stock they may own.

From there, LatinoFreeze.com came to light, bringing a similar message to their cultural community. According to data from Placer.ai, for the week the boycott started, foot traffic fell 6.8% year over year at Target stores.

Beyond consumers, the family of one of Target’s cofounders has become vocal, telling the Los Angeles Times they’re alarmed by the recent decision, saying "It is not ‘illegal’ for a company to create a business model based on what it believes to be important ethical and business standards." And online, in a Target subreddit which has been around since 2010, employees are expressing their frustration too. (It should be noted that the group isn’t affiliated with or endorsed by the company.)

The markets are taking notice. Target’s stock price (NYSE: TGT) is down 24%—from 137.40 on Jan. 24, the day Target cut its programs—to 104.70 on March 15. Within that time frame, the stock is down 10% from when the 40-day kickoff began on March 5, accelerating an ongoing downward trend in its stock price since late 2024. To top it off, The City of Riviera Beach Police Pension Fund filed a class-action lawsuit against Target, its CEO, and board members, claiming they misled investors about the financial risks of Target’s DEI and Environmental, Social, and Governance initiatives. The plaintiffs are alleging that Target downplayed the risks of consumer backlash and boycotts stemming from the changes.

Tesla Is Facing Similar Outcomes

At the same time, Tesla is facing similar outcomes, but for a different reason.

For Tesla, its chief executive’s relationship and time commitment to the Department of Government Efficiency has been seen as a political stance well beyond his lane as the world’s richest man and CEO of multiple entities, from SpaceX and Tesla to Starlink and X.

Tesla’s share price (NAS: TSLA) is down 40% since December, with more than $500 billion being wiped off the company’s value. Beyond just the United States, Musk’s efforts have triggered a global reverberation, as sales across Europe have slumped for the automaker.

On X, users have been less engaged in recent months, while President Trump’s trade war seems to have hit a nerve with the Canadian province of Ontario, which will be "ripping up" its Canadian $100 million (U.S. $68 million) contract with Starlink.

For Tesla specifically, over 350 protesters convened upon a Tesla showroom in Manhattan as part of the nationwide "Tesla Takedown" protest against billionaire Musk.

But They Are Not Alone

According to the People’s Union USA, "whose mission is organizing to take back control of our economy, government, and future," there are more boycotts on the way, or already in progress:

• Amazon: March 7 to 14
• Nestlé: March 21 to 28
• Walmart: April 7 to 13

For now, at least in the short term, it seems that these boycotts are having an effect, but the question is how long it will last. A look into the crystal ball tells us people will continue to vote with their feet in stores and their fingers online—as well as their collective time invested in any particular brand.

Conclusion

As the data continues to roll in, it’s clear that boycotts are having an impact on the companies involved. But the true test will be in the long term: will consumers continue to turn to new outlets and build new brand relationships for their everyday items and anchor purchases? Only time will tell.

FAQs

• What is the purpose of the boycotts?
  The boycotts are aimed at companies that have made changes to their DEI policies and practices, and are seen as having a negative impact on certain communities.
• Which companies are being boycotted?
  Target and Tesla are the two main companies being boycotted, but there are also boycotts planned for Amazon, Nestlé, and Walmart.
• How long will the boycotts last?
  The boycotts are planned to last for a certain period of time, such as 40 days, but it’s unclear if they will continue beyond that.
• What is the impact of the boycotts on the companies?
  The boycotts are having an impact on the companies, with Target’s stock price down 24% and Tesla’s stock price down 40%.
• What is the goal of the boycotts?
  The goal of the boycotts is to put pressure on companies to change their policies and practices, and to hold them accountable for their actions.

Advertising spending on women’s sports surged in 2024, more than doubling from the previous year, according to a new report from TV marketing firm EDO. Women’s basketball attracted the largest share of the investment. With more money flowing into the industry than ever before, these gains could also translate into financial progress for female athletes.

Ad Revenue Breakdown

Advertisers spent $244 million on women’s sports in 2024, marking a 139% year-over-year increase. This ad-dollar boom aligns with a spike in women’s sports viewership. For example, over 2 million viewers tuned into game five of the WNBA championship series, making it the most-watched WNBA game in 25 years. And last spring, the women’s NCAA basketball championship game drew a bigger television audience than the men’s title game for the first time.

Ad Effectiveness

As part of the advertising analysis, EDO also examined online activity within 2 to 5 minutes after the ads ran and found that the ads placed during women’s sports broadcasts generated 40% more activity than the average primetime commercial. This engagement with the ads suggests that spending will continue to increase.

Does More Ad Spending Equal More Pay?

The influx of advertising dollars into women’s sports is a game-changer, but whether it will lead to better pay for female athletes remains to be seen. Although the WNBA is one of the most successful professional women’s sports associations, the pay gap between the WNBA and the NBA remains staggering. According to sports betting site WSN, the average NBA player’s salary is $11.9 million, while WNBA players earn a fraction of that – just $119,590 on average. The disparity is even more glaring at the top. Steph Curry, the NBA’s highest-paid player, rakes in $55.8 million per year, while Jackie Young, the WNBA’s top earner, makes just $252,450.

Female Athletes as Brand Ambassadors

As revenue and viewership grow, another key factor in closing the pay gap is gaining momentum – endorsement deals. Female athletes are becoming increasingly valuable as brand ambassadors.

Endorsement Deals

According to the EDO study, ads featuring WNBA athletes were twice as effective as the primetime average, delivering stronger consumer engagement. CarMax saw nearly three times the league’s average engagement in ads featuring WNBA superstars Sabrina Ionescu, Chiney Ogwumike, A’ja Wilson, and Sue Bird. Meanwhile, New Balance and SKIMS ads featuring Cameron Brink of the Los Angeles Sparks outperformed all others, driving a staggering 1,368% more engagement than the average WNBA ad.

New Media Rights Deal

In July, the WNBA announced a new media rights deal that is predicted to increase revenue and viewership. Starting in 2026, Disney, Amazon, and NBCUniversal will distribute more than 125 WNBA regular season and playoff games nationally each season, and the New York Times predicts that “you should expect them to invest serious marketing dollars.” The potential payoff from this media deal is significant. When the National Women’s Soccer League secured a new media rights deal last year, advertising revenue jumped ninefold. If the WNBA follows suit, this investment could also help reshape the financial landscape for the league and its players.

Conclusion

The surge in ad revenue and viewership in women’s sports is a positive sign for the industry, but it remains to be seen whether it will lead to better pay for female athletes. However, the increasing effectiveness of ads featuring WNBA athletes and the potential for more endorsement deals suggest that the gap may be closing.

FAQs

• What is the current pay gap between the WNBA and the NBA?
  The average NBA player’s salary is $11.9 million, while WNBA players earn just $119,590 on average.
• What is the potential payoff from the new media rights deal?
  The potential payoff from the new media rights deal is significant. When the National Women’s Soccer League secured a new media rights deal last year, advertising revenue jumped ninefold.
• Will the surge in ad revenue lead to better pay for female athletes?
  The influx of advertising dollars into women’s sports is a game-changer, but whether it will lead to better pay for female athletes remains to be seen.