Resistance: Now available in limited edition

- Mrittika Sarkar, XII

The commercialisation of activism often silences or sidelines grassroots voices that ignite, build and sustain social movements. When corporations adopt activist language and aesthetics, they frequently strip them of their radical origins, repackaging complex struggles into digestible slogans that appeal to consumers rather than challenge systems. 

This shift in narrative control replaces frontline activists, especially those from marginalized communities, with brand ambassadors or influencers who may lack lived experience but possess market appeal. As a result, the urgency, discomfort, and political depth of grassroots demands are diluted into feel-good messages designed to sell products. Moreover, brands tend to highlight causes that are "safe" or "trendy", leaving the controversial or system-critical issues, originally championed by grassroots organisers ignored or actively censored. 

As a result, commercialised activism becomes selective in its empathy, platforming struggles that align with corporate interests and silencing those that do not. This not only erodes the authenticity of activism but also limits the transformative potential of protest by prioritising visibility over substance and profit over justice.

This commodified version of activism is not confined to corporate branding alone, but also reinforced by the way mainstream media curates and amplifies certain narratives. Modern media plays a crucial role in shaping how protests are perceived, often packaging them in ways that prioritize spectacle over substance. 

Over time, such media framing leads audiences to engage more with the aesthetic of resistance than with the structural changes being demanded. For instance, peaceful protests led by marginalised communities might receive minimal coverage unless they erupt into conflict, which media can sensationalise. In doing so, the media shapes public memory of protest not by what it stood for, but by how compelling it looked on screen. Over time, this distorts public understanding of activism itself, shifting focus away from radical transformation to momentary emotional appeal, and from structural change to surface level performance.

Together, commercial interests and media aesthetics collaborate to rebrand activism into something that can be consumed, shared and sold. In doing so, they flatten the radical edge of protest, obscure the voices that matter most, and offer a version of justice that feels good but does little. 

True activism resists comfort, demands complexity, and refuses to fit into a frame built for profit.