Bud Light's boycott problem isn't what boycotters think it is

People love to be morally outraged. That's not unique to either political party. It's generally true of anyone who has rigid views with limited room to be sympathetic to people who feel a different way.

You see this on non-political, but polarizing issues all the time. For example, hop into a Facebook book for Royal Caribbean or Carnival and ask "Should smoking be allowed in the ship's casino?"

Related: Bud Light has a new plan as boycotts continue after huge scandal

That question will elicit responses that speak to both sides of the issue. Smokers will defend their right to smoke and tell people who don't like to not visit the casino while non-smokers will complain about being exposed to the smoke. 

It's very rare that you get a smoker who expresses an understanding of why people who don't smoke may not want to be around people smoking. And you almost never see non-smokers get vocal about smokers having rights too. 

Basically, on polarizing issues, people who strongly believe one way or the other usually speak up.  What you don't see in that cruise ship example is people not gambling if non-smokers boycotted cruise ship casinos, then a change might take place, 

People, however, rarely give up something they like on moral grounds. That's because sacrificing for your principles causes you real pain without guaranteeing that any damage will be caused to whatever product or brand you're taking a moral stand against.

That's why most boycotts fail. Outraged liberals still want their Chick-fil-A sandwiches and sometimes only Hobby Lobby has the craft items you need. Right-wing folks can act all up in arms about companies embracing Pride month but they're not skipping their Starbucks lattes, favorite Disney+, or the low prices offered at Target.

Anheuser-Busch InBev BUD, however, has a whole different problem that has led to the Bud Light boycott not only working but having long legs.

A Bud Light boycott is easy

When your best quality is mediocrity, it's best to not make any enemies. Think of that in a professional sports setting. James Harden can be a jerk because he has been an All-Star-level player. The eighth guy on the bench has to be a good teammate who represents the organization well because he's very replaceable.

Bud Light isn't some super offender that pushed its conservative customers too far with its partnership with transgender social media influencer Dylan Mulvaney. It's just a product that people can take a moral stand against because it's easy to replace. 

"Bud Light is a product that has lots of substitutes, such as new products that you can go to quite easily,” he says. “So, if you’re going to the grocery store to buy your pack of beer, right next to Bud Light in the refrigerator is Coors Light or Miller Lite. And for most people, the taste of those products is pretty indistinguishable.," Professor Brayden King of Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management told New York Magazine.

When you boycott Disney, you can't watch the new "Star Wars" shows there's no comparable substitute. People might think Disney grooms kids or whatever other conspiracy theories political agitators like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis allege with no actual proof, but boycotting means you don't get to see what happens to Baby Yoda.

Switching one light beer for another under the guise of outrage that the beer's marketing team thought LGBTQ+ people might like mediocre, bland beer too, works because you get to be angry and pay no cost for that anger.     

Anheuser-Busch is hardly as "woke" as Disney, Starbucks, or Target, brands that actually have made a long-term commitment to supporting the LGBTQ+ community. Instead, it sells a replaceable product that's sold on shelves right next to its pretty much the same rivals.