A month of silence on your apps. One less Prime renewal, one fewer streaming account, a deleted social profile — that’s the idea behind Scott Galloway’s new campaign, “Resist and Unsubscribe.” Launched as an economic protest against recent immigration-enforcement actions and deadly shootings by federal agents, the initiative asks consumers to use their wallets and attention as levers instead of — or alongside — the street protests that have filled U.S. cities.
Galloway, the NYU marketing professor turned public provocateur, frames this as a targeted strike aimed at the CEOs and markets that, he argues, have the president’s ear. “The president responds to economic signals,” he says, urging people to cancel subscriptions and pause purchases from the firms he believes are most influential.
What the boycott asks people to do
For the monthlong push, organizers list 10 primary targets: Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta (Facebook), Microsoft, OpenAI, Netflix, Paramount+, Uber and X. The campaign encourages actions such as cancelling Amazon Prime, pausing paid tiers like ChatGPT Plus, deleting social accounts, and not buying new Apple devices or rides on Uber during February. A secondary list names companies the campaign says do business with ICE — including FedEx, UPS, Comcast and Marriott — urging pressure there too.
Galloway’s math is blunt: subscription revenue is a recurring, visible line item. He used ChatGPT as an example — a few hundred dollars of lost subscriptions per person, multiplied across millions of users, could translate to meaningful hits in market capitalization for highly valued AI and subscription plays. Whether that arithmetic adds up in the real world is the debate.
Why some think it could matter — and why others doubt it
There’s historical precedent for economic pressure changing policy: general strikes and targeted boycotts have toppled governments or forced concessions in far smaller or differently structured economies. But modern consumer behavior is sticky. Studies and past activist campaigns show most boycotts struggle to sustain momentum beyond a splashy opening week.
Skeptics point out practical hurdles: subscriptions are convenient and sometimes deeply integrated into daily life; many consumers will lapse back into old habits; and corporate earnings are driven by many factors beyond a single month of cancellations. Even so, Galloway and some organizers describe the effort as “additive” — a complement to protests and workplace organizing rather than a replacement.
Inside tech, pressure has already been building. Hundreds of workers at major companies have signed petitions and staged walkouts after the killings in Minneapolis that sparked the current wave of outrage. And some CEOs have faced direct scrutiny from employees for remaining publicly muted or for being seen engaging with political leaders linked to the policies under fire.
Practicalities: how people say they’ll participate
Advice from organizers is straightforward: pause or cancel recurring services (Prime, streaming bundles, premium AI tiers), delete — or at least deactivate — social accounts, avoid purchasing from targeted platforms for the month, and use alternative services where feasible. If you stream, that might mean suspending Apple TV+ subscriptions — or at least not renewing this month (you can find Apple TV here).
For those curious about the companies on the list for reasons beyond politics, it’s worth remembering how intertwined these firms are with everyday tech: from the AI models powering search and chat to the apps you use to commute. OpenAI’s consumer-facing products, for example, have been a prominent part of the boycott conversation; readers can trace recent developments in consumer-facing AI in coverage of OpenAI’s moves such as OpenAI’s Sora landing on Android. Google’s expanding AI features in search and apps also put that company squarely in the crosshairs — see reporting on Google’s AI Mode and agentic booking for background. Microsoft’s own AI ambitions add a third dimension to why big tech leaders are seen as levers of influence; their in-house models and services are part of the broader debate about corporate power and politics, as with Microsoft’s MAI-Image-1 launch.
What to watch — and how to think about impact
If dozens or hundreds of thousands of consumers follow through, the immediate financial effect might be modest; the symbolic effect, however, could be larger. Markets react not only to raw cash flows but to investor narratives and media attention. A concentrated, visible drop in consumer engagement could shift boardroom conversations — and, if it makes headlines, could create political pressure too.
Still, anyone considering participating should have realistic expectations. Short-term consumer action rarely forces instant policy reversals. What it can do, at best, is add another layer of cost — reputational, managerial, and sometimes financial — to choices that companies and leaders make. For many activists, that cumulative pressure, combined with protests and internal worker agitation, is the point.
Whether “Resist and Unsubscribe” becomes a footnote or a movement will depend on coordination, staying power, and whether consumers are willing to sustain small inconveniences for a month in service of a larger goal. Even if the campaign doesn’t topple a stock ticker, it’s already moved the conversation about how everyday choices connect to politics — and that alone changes the terrain slightly.
If you plan to participate, think through what you can realistically pause or cancel for a month, set reminders to track savings or impacts, and consider pairing subscription changes with other civic actions: calls to representatives, attendance at local vigils, or workplace organizing. Small acts pile up, and in politics small piles sometimes become avalanches.