BarkBox employee compared Pride to MAGA in leaked memo. The CEO apologized.
BarkBox employee compared Pride to MAGA in leaked memo. The CEO apologized. "I do not agree with the content of the message," BarkBox founder and CEO Matt Meeker said. "It wasn't good, it doesn't reflect our values and I'm deeply sorry that it happened."
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Organizers say political pressure is motivation to continue celebrating Pride
Organizers say political pressure is motivation to continue organizing and celebrating Pride, although some corporate support dwindles.
Less than a week into Pride Month, BarkBox is receiving backlash for a leaked memo that compares an LGBTQ+ themed pet collection to the Make America Great Again movement. Now the monthly dog subscription service's CEO is looking to make amends.
The memo, shared to Reddit this week, informed a group of employees that the monthly dog subscription service would cease advertisements for its Pride collection, which includes several Pride and rainbow accessories. The memo was shared by one employee to a small group of others, BarkBox confirmed to USA TODAY.
"While celebrating Pride is something we may value, we need to acknowledge that the current climate makes this promotion feel more like a political statement than a universally joyful moment for all dog people," the memo shared on Reddit reads. "If we wouldn't feel comfortable running a promotion centered around another politically charged symbol (like a MAGA-themed product), it's worth asking whether this is the right moment to run this particular campaign."
BarkBox CEO: 'It wasn't good'
In a social media statement shared on June 4, BarkBox founder and CEO Matt Meeker apologized for the leaked memo.
"I do not agree with the content of the message," Meeker wrote. "It wasn't good, it doesn't reflect our values and I'm deeply sorry that it happened."
As of June 6, BarkBox's Pride collection was promoted on the BarkBox website. Since the leaked memo, Meeker shared that 100% of the proceeds from the collection will be donated to the LGBTQ resource, Kaleidoscope Youth Center in Columbus, Ohio.
DEI: What fueled the Target DEI boycott? The answer may surprise you
Pride Month: What are the safest places for gay and trans people? See where your state ranks
What else did the BarkBox memo say?
"After some thoughtful discussion today with leadership, we've made the decision to pause all paid ads and lifecycle marketing pushes for the Pride kit effective immediately," the memo shared on Reddit begins.
"This isn't about backing away from support − it's about tone and ensuring our marketing remains inclusive and welcoming to everyone in our community. Right now, pushing this promo risks unintentionally sending the message that 'we're not for you' to a large portion of our audience," the memo concludes.
BarkBox did not confirm when the memo was sent, or by who.
What is BarkBox's Pride collection?
BarkBox's Pride collection features more than 25 LGBTQ+ themed toys, including a rainbow tug toy, "slay the drag queen" plush and "gaylien," an alien plushy with a T-shirt that reads, "Take me to your leather," a reference to the queer leather community.
These items an be added to any BarkBox for an upcharge. A typical BarkBox, which is $24 a month, includes two toys and two treats each month.
More Pride Month: Trump's actions on LGBTQ+ issues in Pride Month criticized as 'bullying' by advocates
Memo leak follows other national brands moving away from DEI
The memo follows a string of companies who have eradicated or pulled back on DEI − diversity, equity and inclusion − programs, including Target, Walmart, Amazon and McDonald's.
The DEI rollbacks began after President Donald Trump took office. As soon as he could, the president issued executive orders to dismantle DEI by putting pressure on federal contractors to end "illegal DEI discrimination" and direct federal agencies to draw up lists of companies that should be investigated for their DEI policies.
And while Trump has been successful in part during his first 100 days in office, there are still countless major companies publicly backing DEI, including Costco, American Express, Apple and Levi's.
Contributing: Jessica Gunn, USA TODAY
Greta Cross is a national trending reporter at USA TODAY. Story idea? Email her at gcross@usatoday.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
I Make $400,000 a Year and Want to Retire at 45 -- Should I Invest More in Stocks or Focus on Real Estate?
On balance, the returns on rental real estate more or less match the stock market's average returns. However, these two types of investments are dramatically different in terms of convenience. In one scenario, the more complicated and capital-intensive option could make the most sense. These 10 stocks could mint the next wave of millionaires › As always, The Motley Fool cannot and does not provide personalized investing or financial advice. This information is for informational and educational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional financial advice. Always seek the guidance of a qualified financial advisor for any questions regarding your personal financial situation. If you'd like to submit your question for feedback, you can do so here. Which is the better investment: real estate or the stock market? It's a question that never seems to stop circulating, mostly because there's never a crystal-clear answer. There are pros and cons to both, and they can vary from one investor to the next. Fortunately, it's possible to figure out the best answer for you. The key is getting a handle on which upsides and which downsides are most applicable in your particular situation. Someone recently asked an entire Reddit community if he should stop buying and renting out residential real estate and instead start pouring this money into the stock market to achieve faster returns. What would you do if you were me?by u/Straight_Ad8203 in Fire It's a great question to be sure. To fully appreciate the answer though, there's a bit more context needed. The individual in question is a 35-year-old medical doctor earning on the order of $400,000 per year at a job that's very demanding. There's a fair amount of money already tucked away in a retirement account and plenty in an emergency fund as well. This person also owns -- and owes on -- four different rental houses. His plan is to accelerate the payoff on these properties with whatever net cash flow is left behind from their rent revenue. This plan at least implies there will be little to no net profit from these properties for the foreseeable future. But paying off these rental houses as soon as possible will allow this doctor to semi-retire at 45 and enjoy some income as an MD, as well as some respectable rental income. His only concern? "Real estate is great but just feels like a slow return." This feeling isn't an uncommon one. But it's also possibly misleading, mostly because the money involved with being a one-person rental real estate company isn't the neat and tidy matter it is when you're running an apartment complex or own enormous office buildings. Yes, the net gains in the value of real estate itself generally lag the stock market's average annual return of around 10%. Although the wild real estate market of late has been an exception to this number, mortgage lender Griffin Funding reports that since 1967, the average U.S. home gains just a little more than 4% per year. Not great. That's also not the whole story, however. In this instance, the property owner is also monetizing this real estate by (presumably) charging rent that's at least a little more than his mortgage payments. The taxes, mortgage interest, and depreciation on this real estate are also tax-deductible expenses, adding to the owner's net/reported profits even if not adding to his tangible cash flow. On balance, renting out real estate you're conventionally financing produces an annual return on your investment of anywhere from 5% to 12%, with an average of 10%, matching the stock market's average full-year return. But that might not be the actual concern to address here, particularly for this busy investor. Far more important are the stress and missed opportunity that come with this plan over the course of the coming decade before he reaches age 45. Being a small-time residential landlord isn't a great venture for busy people. Even just four different tenants are a lot to handle when they're living in four different properties. And, while these rental houses are almost certainly insured, as a landlord, one accident can wreck what's already relatively thin cash flow. Then there's the time factor. This individual is already busy. Finding a new tenant or coordinating with repair people will require more personal time that simply doesn't exist. Also consider the opportunity cost involved with this plan. That's the cost of tying up money to finance the purchase of real estate, or for that matter, just taking care of it. While interest payments are tax-deductible expenses, they're still a real out-of-pocket personal expense using money that could otherwise be invested for growth in other ways -- for free. Ditto for sales commissions and buying and selling. Tax-deductible? Yes. But they're a net cost all the same. (Remember, tax deductions aren't the same as tax credits. You may not get all of this spent money back on the back-end, even if you've got a great accountant.) These nickels and dimes add up when you're not looking. Perhaps the chief reason owning rental real estate isn't quite ideal in this scenario -- when there's a viable alternative use of after-tax income -- is the lack of liquidity should the owner choose to sell a property. You can always sell stocks, even if at a price you don't love. There's never a guarantee you'll be able to get rid of a rental home you no longer want, however, even if you're offering it at a great price. If all goes as planned and this doctor can cut back to working three days per week 10 years from now, the time to effectively manage four rental houses likely will exist then. The business will be net-profitable, with at least a big chunk of properties being paid off. That's a pretty big "if," though. There aren't a lot of part-time doctors who actually only work part-time hours these days. The job often just doesn't allow it. There are no absolutely correct answers, and there's always more to the story. Indeed, there may be a terrific unmentioned reason here to continue focusing on real estate rather than committing this money to stocks. On balance, though, what's known about this particular situation favors owning buy-and-hold stocks over rental homes. If this individual invests wisely over the course of the coming decade -- keeping things simple and efficient, like just owning an index fund -- and actually ends up cutting back to part-time hours at age 45, he can still buy rental property then. He may even be able to outright purchase rental real estate rather than financing it if that's still his goal at that time, saving at least some money as a result. He'll save some money in the meantime too, since the cost of being in the stock market is a pittance compared to owning rental real estate. But you're still committed to owning rental properties right now? Consider this: While it feels great to pay down these loans early, that's not necessarily the best financial move. If the interest rates on these mortgages are low enough, there's a case to be made for drawing out these tax-deductible loans on this cheap money for as long as you can, and investing the extra cash flow in something with a higher rate of return. Your cash flow is certainly going to grow. Remember, rental rates rise regularly, but the size of your mortgage payments usually doesn't. This real estate venture should at least be a measurably higher-margin one 10 years from now. That's one of the chief reasons to stick with it. If you've got time, inclination, money, and ability to own rental real estate, your answer may be different. Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this. On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a 'Double Down' stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves: Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, you'd have $402,034!* Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you'd have $38,158!* Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you'd have $704,676!* Right now, we're issuing 'Double Down' alerts for three incredible companies, available when you join , and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon.*Stock Advisor returns as of June 23, 2025 James Brumley has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. I Make $400,000 a Year and Want to Retire at 45 -- Should I Invest More in Stocks or Focus on Real Estate? was originally published by The Motley Fool
Black America Web
42 minutes ago
- Black America Web
Candace Owens Flips & Feels 'Embarrassed' She Ever Supported Trump, X Reacts
Welp, it happened — Candace Owens has come to glory on the disastrous display of incompetence and non-leadership that is President Donald Trump. That's right, one of Trump's most loyal Sunken Place correspondents has had enough of her MAGA messiah, and now she's 'embarrassed' to have ever supported him. During a recent appearance on 'Piers Morgan Uncensored,' Owens revealed that she is no longer a Trump supporter, largely due to the president ordering B-2 bombers to strike three of Iran's nuclear facilities, butting the U.S.'s nose into the Israel-Iran conflict. (So, you know, not because Trump is a bigoted propagandist who appears to regularly pick and choose when the U.S. Constitution applies to his office. He had to be a warmonger on top of all that for Candace to finally give up on him.) 'He's been a chronic disappointment. And I feel embarrassed that I told people to go vote for him because this wasn't going to happen, and it is happening,' Owens said. The ex- Daily Wire commentator also suggested that Trump wasn't even pulling the strings when he ordered the bombing — which may or may not have actually destroyed Iran's nuclear weapon capabilities — and that the president is actually following the marching orders of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. 'This was not Trump's decision; it was Bibi Netanyahu's decision,' Owens said. 'And that is the reason that he did it. We're very aware that Israel is dictating our foreign policy, and we'd now like that to stop.' Anyway, Owens' about-face on Trump has resulted in mixed reactions on social media. Some are actually praising her for finally seeing the truth, while others are collectively side-eyeing her for trying to get back into the cookout. Then there are the MAGA supporters, who are turning on her faster than Trump turned on Fox News for accurately reporting his poll numbers. Check out some of the reactions below. Candace Owens Flips & Feels 'Embarrassed' She Ever Supported Trump, X Reacts was originally published on
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Budapest Pride: Unprecedented crowd defies Hungarian government at 'illegal' march
Well over a hundred thousand people marched in the Budapest Pride march organised by the NGO Rainbow Mission and city hall, despite the government's ban, standing up for the rights of the LGBTQ+ community as well as for freedom of assembly, and against the Hungarian government's policies. In the spring, the Hungarian ruling parties attempted to ban the annual regular human rights march of the LGBTQ community through a series of constitutional and legislative amendments on the grounds that it violates the rights of children, which they have put above other fundamental rights by amending the constitution. The police rejected the application for a permit by the NGOs that usually organise Pride in the past, at which time the Mayor of Budapest, Gergely Karácsony, announced that another event, the Budapest Pride march, would be held as a municipal event, because the municipality is not subject to the law on assembly and therefore, according to their interpretation of the law, does not need to apply for a permit to hold the event. The police called the event illegal and warned that participants could face fines and organisers up to one year in prison. Despite this, a huge crowd turned out. "I feel we have to stand up now, if we don't speak out now we may never have the chance to do so again," one participant told Euronews. "We're not that political, we really just want to be free, and this is how we can be free, by coming out and standing up for ourselves," a young couple told us. There was concern before the event that police had allowed counter-demonstrations by several far-right groups on the route of the march, but in the event, they were separated from the Pride march and their presence did not cause any disruption. Although the Our Homeland counter-demonstrators blocked the Freedom Bridge on the original route of the march, they were surrounded by police on both sides while Pride participants crossed the Elisabeth Bridge. "What is happening here is completely illegal, it is endangering the healthy development of children, and I find it very sad that the police are not stopping this process," Tamás Gaudi-Nagy, executive director of the National Legal Defence Service, told Euronews. "While the national radical organisations have been restricted in their demonstrations, as they have been for many years, the protesters of Our Homeland have not been allowed to cross the Liberty Bridge." The march was joined by more than 70 members of the European Parliament and several mayors from various European capitals. One of the organisers of the event, Budapest Mayor Gergely Karácsony, who has been threatened with jail by the Hungarian government's justice minister, said in his speech: "If you can ban a Pride event in a European Union member state, then no mayor in Europe is safe, and today, by so many of you coming, you have made Budapest the capital of Europe for this day." Karácsony said that the participants "showed a big gesture to the powers that be", while at the same time he also took a swipe at Péter Magyar, the leader of the strongest opposition party, Tisza, who did not participate in the march and only cautiously posted a message of support on social media without mentioning the name of the event. The mayor said that they would not vote for just anyone in the election against the powers that be. They will support whoever they can rightly expect to make Hungary their common home again. According to the police, to whom Karácsony nevertheless gave special thanks, they had a lot of trouble with what they thought was an illegal gathering, and blamed the organisers for not co-operating with them. However, by 20:00, a total of only 36 people had been stopped and only two people had been arrested - one for hooliganism and one for possession of drugs - meaning that Budapest Pride ended with literally no major incidents.
