Photo by Meta
Meta’s Retreat from SF Pride: A Shift in LGBTQ+ Support?
Meta's 2025 SF Pride support withdrawal sparks LGBTQ+ rights commitment concerns. The shift from ally under Zuckerberg to reduced support mirrors a troubling corporate trend. This article examines the implications, historical context, and challenges faced by LGBTQ+ rights in corporate America, questioning whether it's disengagement or political pressure.
Introduction
This year, Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, has taken a noticeable step back from its previous support of SF Pride, raising eyebrows about its commitment to LGBTQ+ rights. Once a visible ally, Meta’s silence in 2025 has prompted many to question whether the tech giant was truly an advocate for the LGBTQ+ community or merely engaging in pink-washing.
Mark Zuckerberg’s Past Advocacy
In years past, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg personally reached out to SF Pride, ensuring the company could participate in the annual parade, financialexpress.com reports. This was a direct response to backlash following a controversial policy regarding real names that had disproportionately affected trans users. At that time, Zuckerberg’s commitment seemed genuine, contributing to a sense of solidarity between Meta and the LGBTQ+ community. Today it seems like pink-washing Facebook and Meta.
A Decline in Corporate Support
However, the 2025 SF Pride parade highlights a significant change in tone from several major tech companies, including Meta. The San Francisco Pride organisers noted that public support for LGBTQ+ rights appears to have diminished, largely due to political backlash and risk aversion within corporate America. After March 2025, Meta’s formal relationship with SF Pride ended, coinciding with policy changes that rolled back diversity initiatives and reporting of online abuse against marginalised groups.
As LGBTQ+ rights come under increasing scrutiny, the departure of Meta from SF Pride is not just about one company’s choice; it reflects a broader trend in the tech industry and questions the authenticity of corporate support for LGBTQ+ issues.