Does Olay support Israel? How consumer boycotts raise awareness

Editorial Team
Credit: AFP

Olay is a famous skincare brand owned by the multinational company, Procter and Gamble (P&G). Due to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement that embraces this conflict, P&G’s greater business activity and operation and business interests in Israel are also unavoidably bound with the issue of Olay’s support for or against Israel.

Remarkably, one R&D center of P&G is based in Tel Aviv, which is located on the territory that is regarded as the Occupied Palestine by some. This is evident in the huge amounts of money that P&G pours into this research and area, which is put at about 2 billion annually. The Israel House of Innovation makes the company even more incorporated in the scientific and technical life of the country as it carries out its work with such important Israeli organizations as Teva Pharmaceutical Industries or the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

The sheer presence indicates that P&G, and by extension Olay, which is one of their brands, have economic ties with Israel as a result of such relationships and investment. Co-presence in Israel is part of a strategic business plan, which includes opportunities in the local market and exploitation of Israeli innovation.

Implications for Olay and consumer boycotts

Olay, being a P&G brand, the degree to which it relates to Israel can be viewed through the lens of P&G operations. The boycott of Olay goods is promoted by a few advocacy groups and boycott campaigns as part of a general appeal by anti-Zionists to boycott companies that help fund or have investments in Israel, in particular those companies that can be argued to be investors or partners in the occupation of Palestinian territory. Through such initiatives, buying Olay is buying into the Israeli high-tech and economic sector that is concerned with polarizing and polar geo-politics.

However, it is important to keep in mind that Olay does not make any political statements either on Israel or the Israeli-Palestinian clash. Cosmetics and skincare remain the key concerns of the brand, and every attempt to support Israel is on the basis of the interest and spending of the parent corporation, not on brand-specific efforts.

Contextualizing the controversy

The controversy regarding the relationship between Olay and Israel is a part of a bigger conversation on ethical consumption as well as business responsibility. The investment of P&G in Israel is criticized because P&G is supporting the moves of the Israeli government, but the supporters of the investment can point out that the company is helping innovate the region and prodigious the checks in business. This contradiction is an indication of the complexity of multinational companies operating in politically sensitive locations. Some consumers might want to boycott Olay and other products of P&G due to reasons on human rights and geopolitical concerns, and consumers who pay more attention to the global scope of the brand and the quality of the products offered than to relations and business connections.

What are the main arguments of those calling for a boycott of Olay over Israel?

There is the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement that targets corporate entities that have something to do with the policies and operations of Israel against the Palestinian territory, and through which the boycott of Olay over Israel is highly fuelled. The activists also argue that purchasing Olay products indirectly sponsors the Israeli unending occupation and purported human rights violations since the company is a property of Procter and Gamble (P and G), which has immense operations and investments in Israel.

Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC) activists consider that companies like P&G are involved in the support of an Israeli regime of settler-colonialism and apartheid, which has existed in Palestine for 76 years. They argue that through economic involvement, racial segregation, unlawful occupation, and institutional persecution of Palestinians are all viable forces.

  • Encouragement of breaches of International law: The boycotters cite rulings of international courts that have warranted arrests of Israeli leaders on charges of war crimes and condemned the Israeli occupation. They argue that the offenses are caused by businesses that do business in Israel and must assume responsibility.
  • Economic pressure as a peaceful weapon: Boycotts such as Olay are believed to be a successful and non-violent solution to pressurize Israel to change its policies. Opponents cite economic isolation against Israel to bring it to terms with international law and respect for Palestinian rights, as was the case with the boycott of South Africa over the anti-apartheid movement.
  • Moral responsibility and solidarity: Boycott advocates emphasize a moral response to the boycott, recommending not to support businesses that benefit or assist organizations and businesses in what they describe as continued violence, dispossession, and Palestinian human rights abuse. The consumers are encouraged to do their part by refusing to buy products that relate to the Israeli military or economy.

How might boycotting Olay impact awareness of Palestinian issues?

Boycotts constitute another non-violent protest mechanism that creates awareness about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the international scene. This group action helps to attract attention to the continued occupation and alleged denial of human rights as customers resolve not to buy Olay products in protest over the role of its mother company, Procter & Gamble, in Israel. Such an approach to shopping creates awareness of the Palestinian conflict all over the world because it introduces the dilemma into the mainstream discourse in the non-conventional political sphere. According to Social Identity Theory, boycotting makes people think that they are a part of something since there are values that people hold, such as justice and human rights.

This unity connects people and groups of people into one common cause, despite their racial and religious differences, and moves the global pro-Palestinian movement. Digital tools enhance the boycott by extending its influence and carrying additional weight in customer decisions to purchase ethically correct products. It is a prolonged engagement and encouragement that pressures future interactions with Israeli-related companies by doing this on the web.

Even though the effects of boycotting a certain company are unlikely to be very financial, it can attract attention and send a message of general dissent against Israeli policies. This economic aspect helps the political message by encouraging companies to reconsider their support of Israel and stimulating the debate in society on corporate responsibility in the zones of conflict. The boycott against Olay spreads a culture of ethical consumption due to the consideration of the moral aspect of the customer’s purchase. Such a shift can give rise to a better understanding of the Palestinian case and help the Palestinian communities become economically independent because people will know how to invest in Palestinian-owned businesses or businesses that practice fair trade and humanitarianism.

Could boycotting Olay mobilize more people to support Palestinian rights?

Through employing the form of consumer activism as an effective and manageable way of protest, the process of boycotting Olay as part of a bigger boycott of companies linked to Israel can turn more individuals toward giving voice to Palestinian rights. This mobilizing effect is backed by the following factors:

  • The boycott movement is not centralized and centered on such layperson activism that pretty much any regular consumer, student, employee, and ordinary person can easily participate by refusing to buy specific products like Olay. This openness also helps new individuals to join the cause by increasing the number of supporters who are not members of traditional political or activist organizations.
  • Olay is a renowned brand, and Procter and Gamble is its ultimate owner, which has an immense interest in Israel. The boycott against this company brings out economic connections that help sustain the Israeli occupation. This association informs the customers about the human rights issues and the bigger political picture, which in turn encourages them to read more and do more.
  • Through social media campaigns such as Boycott App social media platforms, users can easily find the businesses that must be boycotted and share the news.

Key takeaways

The merely symbolic power of mass consumer rejection has a potent effect on governments and corporations, even though the immediate monetary value of boycotting the specified brand can be insignificant. This pressure would help change the minds of the masses by making corporations more responsible, and in this process, it is possible that other individuals, too, will be moved to help in the same manner to support the rights of Palestinians. The boycott movement has thus tied the Palestinian plight into their struggles with other global systems of justice, like climate justice and indigenous rights, due to their formation of intersectional alliances that attract immense numbers of supporters. This makes the boycott even more relevant and appealing, and it motivates the people who would not have participated before.

About Us

Brussels Morning is a daily online newspaper based in Belgium. BM publishes unique and independent coverage on international and European affairs. With a Europe-wide perspective, BM covers policies and politics of the EU, significant Member State developments, and looks at the international agenda with a European perspective.
Share This Article
The Brussels Morning Newspaper Logo

Subscribe for Latest Updates