The Effects of Celebrity-Driven Boycotts: The Case of Brunei’s Draconian Laws

Actor George Clooney's call for a boycott of all top hotels owned by the Sultan of Brunei, such as the Dorchester Beverly Hills and Hotel Bel-Air, has sparked a debate about their effectiveness in raising awareness, impacting businesses, and influencing diplomatic relations. This article examines the potential impact of such a boycott and the broader implications for the Sultan of Brunei's policies.

Effectiveness in Raising Awareness and Media Coverage

George Clooney's initiative has already proven effective in raising awareness and putting a spotlight on the issue. A search through Google News reveals a significant shift in media coverage, with the Sultan of Brunei now associated with human rights abuses and a boycott related to these policies.

Here are the top 7 articles I found from a Google News search for “Sultan of Brunei”:

The Sultan of Brunei: Opulence, Power, and Hard-Line Islam This Is What It's Like to Be Gay in Brunei Where the Penalty Is Stoning KCL Reviews Sultan of Brunei Honours Brunei Stoning Punishment for Gay Sex and Adultery Takes Effect Despite International Outcry Elton John Joins George Clooney’s Call for Boycott of Sultan of Brunei’s Hotels Hotel Boycott Call over Brunei Sultan Brunei to Punish Gay Sex and Adultery with Death by Stoning

Notably, none of these articles primarily focus on the criticism of the boycott. Instead, they link the Sultan's policies with negative public perception, prompting a shift in discussions about his regime.

Impact on Businesses

A small drop in business, such as vacant rooms or reduced rates, can significantly impact a hotel's image and exclusivity. Even if the financial impact on the Sultan’s hotels is minimal, the reputational damage from the boycott could have long-lasting effects.

For instance, a May 2014 New York Times article noted that a boycott in 2014, following the announcement of the stoning policies, led to a revenue loss of approximately $2 million for the hotels. This issue also gained significant support from Beverly Hills' mayor, further highlighting the effectiveness of the initial boycott.

Effect on Diplomatic Relationships

Despite the condemnation from various media outlets and even celebrities, the Sultan's regime is unlikely to be significantly affected diplomatically. Most governments will likely issue statements of disapproval but will not take substantial action, similar to the case of Jamal Khashoggi and Saudi Arabia.

The symbolic and reputational harm the boycott has caused, however, should not be underestimated. Negative press from diverse sources can lead to difficulties for public companies in doing business with the Sultan, even if the direct financial impact is limited.

Emotional and Social Impact

The most telling aspect of the boycott's effectiveness is the shift in public perception. When people now think of the Sultan of Brunei, they often associate him with human rights abuses, stoning punishments, and a celebrity-led boycott. This change in sentiment can be more impactful than merely financial losses.

George Clooney's ability to leverage media coverage and his influence in Hollywood has ensured that the issue remains in the public eye. Even if the boycott does not result in substantial financial harm, its symbolic significance and the ongoing public discourse will continue to pressure the Sultan's regime.

Conclusion

Overall, a celebrity-driven boycott like George Clooney's can be a powerful tool in raising awareness, impacting businesses, and influencing public opinion. While financial impacts may be limited, the boycott can profoundly affect the regime's reputation and the public's perception of their policies.