A Position Paper on Danish Consumers and the Newspaper’s Decision to Publish the Mohammad Cartoon
Although Arla Foods had nothing to do with the cartoons that depicted Muhammad published by Danish newspapers they became caught in the middle of a heated debate. Muslims became enraged by the cartoons and in turn boycotted Arla because it was a symbol of Denmark and its values. In order to gain control Arla “began an advertising campaign in the Middle East that stressed that it respected Muslim culture and religion.” [1] Many Danes were offended by Arla’s lack of loyalty toward country and with encouragement from women’s groups began to boycott Arla as well.
Danish consumers were furious with Arla Foods for turning their backs on the Danish people in order to make money. Arla disregarded the Danes principles of free speech by condemning the cartoons published by the Danish newspaper.
Motives, Stakes and Powers of the Danish Consumer
Motives:
The Danish consumer’s pride for their country and feelings of betrayal of Arla provoked them to begin boycotting Arla Foods. The Danish consumers hope was that the boycott would communicate their displeasure of Arla’s actions and that the company would not disregard Danish values in order to make money. Arla actions such as, removing the Danish flag from many of its products and advertising that they did not agree with cartoons being published in newspaper and respected Muslims and understood their reason to boycott, verified for Danes that Arla no longer respected Danish values.
Women’s groups in Denmark were outraged with Arla for their comment, “justice and tolerance are basic teachings of the Islamic religion” [2] they believed that this was an insult to women all over the world and that it “sent the wrong message about Denmark’s traditions of equality and free speech.”[2] The women’s groups in Denmark wanted Arla to recognize the importance of equality and women’s rights and not submit itself to a group that does not respect this right.
Stakes:
The Danish consumer’s freedom of expression is at stake as the Arla Foods and cartoon crisis heightens. The Danish people, including the Prime Minister of Denmark, believe the freedom of expression is not something that needs to be apologized for and that it “is a vital and indispensable element of Danish society.” [2] Danes no longer want to feel fear of Muslim rebellion for expressing their opinion in a free country. Much of this debate started when a Danish author was trying to bring religious knowledge to children and was faced with illustrators being afraid of the retaliation from Muslim extremist. The Danes fear was already allowing Muslims to corrupt their freedoms so it was time for Danish people to stand up for their freedoms before their freedom vanished.
Powers:
The Danish consumer’s power to boycott and their buying power has left Arla Foods with no one on their side. As the Danish consumers grow more disgraced by Arla’s actions their reputation in Europe is being tarnished. The boycotts have brought so much attention that all Europeans are upset by Arla’s action of distancing itself as a Danish company and they are also enraged with Muslim behavior and their request for an apology for the published cartoons. The European Union President, Jose Manuel Barroso stated, “We must safeguard these principles. Freedom of speech is part of Europe’s values and traditions. Let me be clear. Freedom of speech is not negotiable.” [2] Europe stands united behind the Danish people to uphold their freedom of speech and to illustrate their disapproval with Arla Foods.
Goals, Strategies and Tactics of the Danish Consumer
Goals:
The Danish consumer’s goals in boycotting Arla Foods is to remind the company that the opinions, values and rights of consumers in its home market are based on human rights and are therefore more valid than those of its Middle East market consumers. They want to let Arla and the Imams know that they, like the Muslim consumers, can also “speak” with their purchases. Additionally, the Danish consumers want to seize the opportunity to make a stance against the Muslim nations’ repression of women, denial of free speech and illustrate their power as consumers and citizens in a free and secular society.
Strategies:
The Danish consumers, including the woman’s groups’ strategy is to follow the lead of their Prime Minister of holding firm to the unapologetic premise of freedom of expression. They plan to vocalize their offense at what they perceive as Arla’s submission to Islamic fundamentalism, the boycott of Danish goods and in particular to Arla’s open condemnation of Jyllands-Posten, a clear repudiation of the freedom of speech.
Tactics:
Immediate response to the ads in the Muslim newspapers in the form of
The Danish consumer, feeling betrayed and offended by Arla Food’s advertisements and negation of Denmark’s established freedoms have decided to use their purchasing power to send the company a message. These consumers, and proud Danes in general, believe that freedom of expression is a fundamental human right and will not tolerate its being trampled upon by another cultures’ customs, expectations and demands and they will send their message to both the company and the Muslim community.
Bibliography
[1] Mordhorst, Mads. European Business Forum. Does Nationality Still Matter? http://www.ebfonline.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=311
[2] Wesley, David. Northeastern University. Arla Foods and the Cartoon Crisis, 2008.
[3] Gudmundsson, Hjortur. Denmark: Moderate Muslims Oppose Imams, 2006.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/689