DR. JAMAL BRYANT,
TARGET &
THE NEW BOYCOTT POLITICS
From a 40-day Lenten fast at Target to viral comments about Asian-owned businesses — how Dr. Bryant became the center of a national debate about Black economic power, spiritual leadership, and the limits of boycott strategy.
WHO IS DR. JAMAL BRYANT?
Dr. Jamal Bryant is the senior pastor of New Birth Missionary Baptist Church in Stonecrest, Georgia — one of the largest and most prominent Black megachurches in metro Atlanta. He is known nationally as a civil rights advocate, social justice preacher, and economic empowerment leader with a large social media following and media presence.
Bryant has used his pulpit and platform to connect faith, economics, and Black community power in ways that attract both significant support and significant controversy.
THE TARGET BOYCOTT EXPLAINED
In early 2025, Target announced it was scaling back its DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) commitments — a move that followed similar corporate retreats by other major companies responding to political pressure, particularly following a Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action.
Dr. Bryant launched what he framed as a 40-day Lenten economic fast from Target, asking Black consumers to redirect their spending during Lent. The spiritual framing was deliberate: making economic protest a moral and faith-based act, not merely a political strategy.
The Goal
Pressure Target to restore DEI commitments and Black supplier partnerships.
The Framing
40-day Lenten 'fast' — spiritual discipline meets economic strategy.
The Scale
Millions in social media reach; significant mainstream media coverage.
The End
Bryant announced the fast concluded after 40 days. Target made limited acknowledgments.
DID THE TARGET BOYCOTT WORK?
Results are contested. Target reported some sales softness in Black consumer categories during the boycott period, but analysts disagree on causation. Critics of the boycott argued that:
- · The 40-day endpoint was announced in advance, limiting long-term pressure.
- · Some Black-owned brands sold at Target were hurt by the boycott.
- · Without specific demands met, ending the boycott appeared to many as a concession.
- · Corporate DEI rollbacks continued industry-wide regardless.
Supporters argued the boycott raised awareness, demonstrated Black consumer consciousness, and built infrastructure for future economic organizing.
FROM TARGET TO ASIAN-OWNED BUSINESSES
Following the Chow verdict, Dr. Bryant made public statements — widely shared and debated on social media — that connected the verdict to questions about where Black consumers spend money, specifically referencing Asian-owned businesses in Black neighborhoods.
EDITORIAL NOTE — FACTUAL FRAMING
BlackAtlanta covers Dr. Bryant's statements as civic and economic commentary. We present the debate around those statements — the support, the criticism, and the nuance — without endorsing or condemning any specific call to boycott a racial category of businesses. We distinguish between strategic economic protest and racial blame.
The debate Bryant ignited surfaces a real tension: Black communities have long debated the ethics and strategy of economic self-determination in neighborhoods where Asian-owned, Korean-owned, and other immigrant-owned businesses have historically served as the primary retail infrastructure.
That conversation — however uncomfortable — is legitimate civic discourse. How it is framed, however, matters enormously.
THE STRATEGIC VS. RACIAL BOYCOTT DISTINCTION
STRATEGIC ECONOMIC PROTEST
- ✓Specific target (one company or category)
- ✓Specific demands
- ✓Defined success criteria
- ✓Exit strategy
- ✓Builds Black economic alternatives
- ✓Based on policy, not race
RACIAL BLAME ECONOMICS
- ✗Targets entire racial group
- ✗No specific demands
- ✗No defined success criteria
- ✗No exit strategy
- ✗Punishes innocent businesses
- ✗Based on race, not policy