President Calvin Coolidge stated in 1925 that the: "the chief business of the American people is business". This quotation has been somewhat truncated in history to be remembered as "the business of America is business." However, it is rendered, the point is essentially the same, and any consumer would be well to remember it, which is that America takes its business and its money very, very seriously. It then follows that if you want to make an impact, an impact will be made, when the everyday flow of money to businesses is interrupted in some way, form, or fashion. That is to say, many people will nod their head, distractingly or not, or mumble their agreement about whatever that you are talking about, but they often won't readily react to any of it, till it affects their life or their bottom line.
This modern age has never seen a better time to organize and to initiate boycotts, mainly because the ability to stay in contact, connect, and communicate with other people of a like mindset, has never been easier, with all of the tools that allows one to stay in touch with one another in real time, via cell phone, or similar, and further that the power and immediacy of social media can easily take a smidgen of an idea, create a molehill of it within a short span of time, and possibly a mountain from it within just a few days.
Each person, in themselves, has economic power, and this power is utilized each and every day, whether recognized or not, by the financial decisions that we make, so that in aggregate, these decisions may easily affect the bottom line of corporations which rely on consistent buying behaviors and revenue streams to maintain their status and profitability. Further to the cause, there are many products and services that are somewhat similar one to another, to which, the only real differentiation between it and a competitor is the perceived status symbol or reputation that a given product has over its rival. Therefore, anything that is brought to the fore that might tarnish a company's burnished image, is certainly something that most companies would be vitally concerned about, irrespective as to whether there is a belief by that particular company as to whether the boycott has merit or not.
This means that targeted boycotts are in actuality accomplishing a dual purpose: of impacting sales, as well as impacting the product and the perception of such, to which all of this combined impacts the bottom line. It is that threat or the actual action of, that creates the dialog between those that boycott and the company that has created the issues of the boycott to begin with. Unfortunately, in America, appealing to the better nature of people or a given company's character, often will not accomplish much of anything, whereas battles that affect the flow of money, whether in the short or the long term, will most definitely get a response.
In addition, the mainstream media will often play a massive role in the effectiveness or nationalization of a boycott, to which the boycotters can help their cause by being able to present their issue in such a manner that the "sound bites" of this modern age can distill it and highlight it so as to engage the short attention span of most general audiences. Boycotts can be highly effective, and can be looked upon as grassroots democracy in action, recognizing that organized people have the ability to vote with their dollars each and every day.