Stopped reading at the uncritical use of the word “transgenderism” and the unanalyzed repetition of the falsehood that Budweiser suffered financially from the Dylan Mulvaney thing (it didn’t).

Not sure what fence the author is trying to sit on, but I’ll take my opinion fluff pieces from people who aren’t actively aiding the conservative culture war.

Wait you think Budweiser didn’t suffer financially from sponsoring DM? What metric are you using to determine financial loss?

The profits made by the company.

Bud lite may have sold less, but people switched up other brands by the same company, and it ended up higher than what was lost.

This is demonstrably false. Anheuser-Busch’s share price was at a 12 month high when the Dylan Mulvaney controversy happened, and it’s still down ~15% since then, basically starting the drop the day they did the partnership.

You can see this for yourself on the stock market. Look at their share price since mid April - it was $66, it’s now $58. That means that they have lost a lot of money on it. Where are you getting that is now higher than what was lost?