When a Brand is Tainted: The Ethics of Song Selection in Corporate Worship

Abstract

Our very brief story begins on a typical day in Jacksonville, Florida, in 2010—hot, humid, with a chance of scattered showers in the afternoon. I was deciding what I wanted to eat for lunch, so I pulled my vehicle into the drive-through at Chick-fil-A and ordered my usual: a fried chicken sandwich, waffle fries, and sweet tea. I then ate the meal and enjoyed it. That’s the end of the story. I told you it was short. The simplicity of this scenario changed drastically in 2011. Chick-fil-A gained the national spotlight when its president, Dan Cathy, defended the company’s monetary donations to organizations supporting "biblical marriage" (i.e., one man and one woman). Between the news cycle commentators, op-ed columnists, bloggers, and social media pundits, Chick-fil-A went from a well-respected fried chicken powerhouse to an ethical quandary for some, and a rallying cry for others on both sides of the proverbial fence. The chicken sandwich was no longer just a chicken sandwich. The ubiquity of social media and its algorithmic echo chambers fueled the controversy. Even today—many years after Cathy’s public comments—the Chick-fil-A brand is treated with adoration from political and theological conservatives and with suspicion from liberals and progressives. In 2019, Chick-fil-A modified its charitable giving strategy to focus on education, homelessness, and hunger. In doing so, they ceased donations to groups scrutinized by the media such as the Salvation Army and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. However, despite their best efforts to pivot in response to controversy, for many, Chick-fil-A remains a tainted brand. Among critics and questioners of Chick-fil-A, the topic of how to respond ethically proved to be a dividing point. In 2018 (and updated in 2022), Noah Michelson, Editorial Director of HuffPost Personal, penned the article “If You Really Love LGBTQ People, You Just Can’t Keep Eating Chick-fil-A.” A large photo of a spread of Chick-fil-A food adorns the article, with the biting subtitle “queerphobia never tastes good.” In no unclear terms, he contends that LGBTQ persons and allies need to choose where their loyalties lie—“with your community or with your stomach.” Marie Whitaker is not as hard-lined, offering her thoughts in the NBC News article, “I’m black and gay and I still eat at Chick-fil-A.” She summarily quips, “The next time I treat myself to the chain’s sinful but tasteful fried chicken and white bread, I will give triple the money I spend to the marriage equality effort.” In a similar pivot, Executive Director of Baptist News, Mark Wingfield, refused to boycott the restaurant, instead suggesting readers redirect their frustration by boycotting politicians who work against the rights of LGBTQ people.