A growing conversation on Nigerian social media is calling for a boycott of Glovo, the international delivery platform, over reported issues including high service fees, alleged unfair treatment of delivery riders, and concerns about pricing transparency. Some users argue that Glovo’s model disadvantages local riders and encourages pricing patterns that don’t reflect local earning realities. Others defend Glovo, noting that it provides convenience and jobs in an increasingly digital service economy.
When a brand becomes the subject of a boycott call, it tells us something quieter and deeper than the surface disagreement — it signals a moment of collective self-reflection about values, economy, and community fairness. Nigeria’s tech ecosystem today sits at an intersection: the allure of global convenience meets the lived daily realities of local gig workers who carry the weight of that convenience on city streets. The question about Glovo, then, isn’t simply “Should we stop using an app?” but “What kind of systems do we want to strengthen with our choices?” In a swiftly digitalising economy, every tap on a screen sends an economic ripple towards someone — a rider, a restaurant owner, a platform investor — and often these ripples are felt before they’re seen.
In this light, the call for a boycott becomes less about a single company and more about agency — who gets to benefit from the networks we participate in, who gets seen, and who continues to stay behind the scenes. Perhaps the deeper question this moment invites isn’t just yes or no, but this: when we withhold our participation from a platform, what vision of fairness, dignity, and reciprocity are we choosing to support instead?
In an economy where choices often feel small — a tap here, a click there — how do you decide which systems deserve your support and which ones need you to walk away?
✍️“feel free to disagree in the comments
👀 ☝️👆 & let JAIYEORIE know what U think!”
📎
No comments:
Post a Comment