EXCLUSIVE: Campaign Highlights Oreo’s Partnership With ‘Militant’ LGBTQ Group

Brands Face Growing Pressure From Activist Shareholders Over LGBTQ Marketing

Corporate Support for A4TE: Ideological Activism and Reputational Risk

Advocates for Trans Equality (A4TE) is a transgender-rights advocacy organization dedicated to advancing the legal and political rights of transgender individuals in the United States. Formed in 2024 through the merger of the National Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE) and the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund (TLDEF), A4TE engages in public policy advocacy, impact litigation, political activity, research and data collection, and community organizing to advance its objectives.  A4TE has actively opposed federal and state legislation seeking to restrict transition-related medical interventions for minors. Including, organizing a coalition of more than 160 national and grassroots organizations that urged Congress to reject H.R. 3492, legislation which sought to establish federal criminal penalties for providing certain transition-related procedures to minors. A4TE characterized the targeted treatments as “safe and evidence-based” health care and argued that restrictions would interfere with medical decision-making.  A4TE references WPATH’s Standards of Care in support of transition-related medical care, despite the guidelines facing federal legal scrutiny. In June 2026, the FTC and four states sued WPATH, alleging misleading claims about the safety, effectiveness, and medical necessity of certain pediatric interventions.   Major corporations, including Apple, Amazon, Google, and Disney, have been identified as corporate partners of A4TE. Through these partnerships, …

Corporate stewardship, the cost of ideological activism, and the trust that built America.

In this episode of The WallBuilders Show, Doug Napier, Executive Chairman and CEO of 1792 Exchange, joined host Rick Green to discuss The American Company, 1792 Exchange’s new effort to define and celebrate companies that act American. The conversation explores what separates a patriotic company from one that only waves the flag, and how Americans can help recognize the companies doing it right. Key Topics Discussed:

Accenture said it ditched DEI. The DOJ just caught them running secret race scorecards

Color-coded monthly dashboards. Separate promotion conversations for candidates who moved demographic numbers in the “right” direction. Leadership programs with the door closed to the “wrong” race or sex. These are just a few of the flashing indicators that companies who should have known better had nonetheless embraced illegal employment practices. The avoidable result was the payment of huge fines. IBM paid $17 million. Deloitte paid $21.5 million. Now Accenture agreed to pay $25 million to resolve Justice Department allegations that it did the same things, while certifying it did not in order to continue its collection of big bucks from taxpayers. Three of the largest consulting firms — companies selling “expert” advice to government and Fortune 500 clients on workplace “transformation” — have written checks totaling $63.5 million in a single year under the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative. That’s a pattern. And a problem.  The DOJ alleged that since 2017, Accenture Federal Services treated race and sex as factors in hiring and promotions to hit “stealth” workforce composition goals. Business-unit leaders received monthly summaries of the exact percentage of each race and sex in their units, highlighted to show if they were on target. Those scorecards drove improper hiring decisions, …

Your Company’s Charity List May Have a Political Screen Built in

Millions of workers in America donate to charities through giving portals set up by their employers, confident that a full range of legitimate nonprofits is just a few clicks away. But this trust, unfortunately, is often misplaced. Many companies turn to third-party platforms such as Benevity, Bonterra and Groundswell to operate their charitable-giving programs. Benevity is the largest of these, processing billions of dollars in donations annually. Though it does not publish a full list of its clients, research by my organization, 1792 Exchange, has identified more than 200 Fortune 1000 companies with Benevity portals, representing millions of employees. Part of the appeal of these services is that experts have done the vetting work. So employees who use them to make donations reasonably assume that if a charity is excluded, it failed some objective test of legal compliance, financial transparency or organizational integrity. In the case of Benevity, however, that assumption is often incorrect. And the problem is not that companies outsource the work of vetting nonprofits to Benevity. The problem is in the process used to decide which organizations to include and which to leave out. The full article can be found in The Washington Post.

Carbon Measures: Measuring the Wrong Bottom Line

Carbon Measures represents a global coalition of businesses establishing a carbon emissions framework for company value chains which, ultimately, informs and restructures a business’s policies regarding emissions. The carbon accounting “framework” is no more than an extension of ESG integration into business practices, which puts business missional priority on the back burner while putting strain on suppliers. The coalition ultimately aims to influence policy: product-level carbon intensity standards that would “create markets in which businesses are rewarded for investing in low-carbon production.”  That should concern businesses. Businesses are limited on resources: time and attention being absolute essentials for any business. When carbon becomes the primary measure, the business’ central mission automatically takes a back seat. Companies no longer fight for the quality of product that customers seek. When a customer comes to a business to purchase a product, they receive an abstract ideology purchased alongside a worthless product. Competition now lies in the order of the regulator. Specifically, to this coalition, “innovation, competition, and the power of the market” are vague empty platitudes, lacking in any specific details, for any sensible businessman to know that businesses are not built on whims or maybes.