The Prof G Pod with Scott Galloway

Scott Galloway Answers Your Questions on Resist and Unsubscribe

February 6, 2026

Key Takeaways Copied to clipboard!

  • Economic pressure via consumer non-participation, specifically targeting subscription revenue in Big Tech, is considered a more potent lever for change than traditional boycotts because small disruptions in subscription growth yield massive market capitalization impacts. 
  • The risk of political backlash, where opponents blame economic downturns on the movement, is acknowledged but dismissed as inevitable regardless of the action taken. 
  • The 'Resist and Unsubscribe' movement focuses on consumer choice regarding non-essential spending (like streaming services) rather than actions that risk employment or essential needs, aiming to signal power through the purse. 

Segments

Introduction to Resist and Unsubscribe
Copied to clipboard!
(00:01:39)
  • Key Takeaway: The ‘Resist and Unsubscribe’ campaign advocates using economic pressure, specifically targeting subscriptions, as the most effective lever for political change.
  • Summary: The episode introduces the ‘Resist and Unsubscribe’ campaign, which centers on the idea that economic pressure, not outrage, drives change. A dedicated website has been created to guide users on which services to avoid. The goal is to show consumers they possess more power through non-participation and control over their spending.
Political Blame and Market Response
Copied to clipboard!
(00:02:07)
  • Key Takeaway: Republicans will attribute any resulting economic downturn to Democrats regardless of the cause, but market signals like a falling S&P 500 would create significant political trouble for the current administration.
  • Summary: A listener questioned if Republicans would blame Democrats for a recession caused by boycotts, suggesting waiting might be better. Scott Galloway argues that political blame is guaranteed, but the president responds primarily to market signals, such as the S&P 500 performance. Consumer action is framed as a necessary leverage point because the market currently grants the administration license to act freely.
Potential Failures and Backfire Risks
Copied to clipboard!
(00:05:26)
  • Key Takeaway: The movement could backfire if it becomes politicized, leading conservatives to intentionally support targeted corporations, or if it causes job losses for those working in media platforms.
  • Summary: A major risk is the politicization of corporate spending, where opposing groups might actively subscribe to targeted companies to undermine the effort. The host admits personal risk, citing a canceled speaking gig and lost advertising revenue for Prop G Media due to the political nature of the campaign. The host worries most about unforeseen negative consequences hitting his team’s economic well-being.
Consumer vs. Advertiser Pressure Points
Copied to clipboard!
(00:09:46)
  • Key Takeaway: Targeting subscription revenue in Big Tech is superior to pressuring advertisers because subscription revenue growth is priced into market capitalization far more critically than advertising spend fluctuations.
  • Summary: The question arose whether pressuring advertisers (who control 97% of Meta’s revenue) is more efficient than persuading millions of consumers. The host explains that Meta’s diverse advertiser base makes coordinated advertiser pressure ineffective, as seen in past attempts. A small disruption in subscription revenue for Big Tech companies, which are priced to perfection, creates a massive ripple effect on market cap, hitting the decision-makers who influence the President.