I have appointments throughout today, so I’ve set up a few things to read. This one is interesting in that it ties several things together to show us how not only our government but our companies are selling us into thinking we might actually get some fair treatment. It piqued my interest because of the strike last week; it seems “brands” are trying to work against being seen as part of those needing to understand what we the people don’t like how things are and that we expect change. Resist-
Endless shrimp is a force that gives us meaning
The brands heard that you were lonely and would like to propose a solution
Red Lobster wants your attention. You can tell, because their current ads deploy not one but two separate announcers. Thereโs the expository guy. Heโs a little pushy but at least he sticks to the facts. And then thereโs the loud guy. Heโs got a deep voice. He sounds like heโs broadcasting live from the submerged city of Atlantis. He says it with feeling, and also reverb.
โBecause youโve been askingโฆ a lotโฆ and we made it happen.โ
So claims the not-from-Atlantis announcer. But whatโs he talking about? We have been asking for many things. To be able to afford homes, for example, or not to have war crimes committed in our names, or to have our planet still exist twenty years from now.
Oh, this is about shrimp. Endless shrimp. Itโs back, or so Iโm told, in multiple forms. Every time the less pushy guy shares one of the currently available shrimp offerings, his partner pipes up with a complementary point straight from the bottom of the sea.
โWaltโs favorite shrimp.โ
โ ENDLESS!โ
โGarlic shrimp scampiโ
โENDLESSโ
โShrimp linguini alfredoโ
โENDLESS?โ
โAnd all new marry me shrimpโ
โALL ENDLESS!โ
The duo isnโt wrong. Endless shrimp is back. While the previous iteration didnโt technically bankrupt the chain (the real culprit was private equity and real estate chicanery) it was, by all accounts, an absolute mess. American consumers, who rightfully identified that they were getting ripped off in every facet of their lives, leapt at the opportunity to get one over at least one big business.
Back when Endless Shrimp was a permanent feature, shrimp hoarders would occupy tables for hours at a time, not leaving until they beat the house. The real victim of this behavior was, of course, the chainโs underpaid servers (if you walk into a restaurant with โme against these suckersโ mindset, youโre less likely to view your waiter as a fellow victim of capitalism and youโre definitely not going to tip well). For the C-Suite, though, the larger concern wasnโt the dignity of their employees. It was a jumbo-sized hole in their bottom line.
Itโs like The Boss once sang. Endless shrimp dies baby, thatโs a fact. But maybe the endless shrimp that dies, some days comes back. Put your make-up on, do your hair up pretty, and meet me tonight at the only Red Lobster still open in your city.
Iโm not all that interested in the relative success or failure of chain restaurant promotions, but I do care about the various ways corporations try to win our affection (meaningful cultural signifiers, or so Iโd argue). And contra the two announcer voices, the most interesting thing about Red Lobsterโs promotion isnโt the shellfish, either of the Waltโs Favorite or Marry Me varieties. Itโs whatโs whispered rather than shouted.
You see, the biggest difference between the current iteration of Endless Shrimp and its unprofitable predecessor is that now Red Lobster wants you to know that you (the shrimp-loving consumer) and they (the company) are in this together.
If you want the full story, I highly recommend this piece by Luke Winkie in Slate, but hereโs the truncated version. There are varieties of shrimp on the Red Lobster menu that arenโt officially part of the promotion. Theyโre on the menu, but excluded from the benevolent blanket of endlessness. But if a customer were to ask for unlimited quantities of a non-official item (for example, Crispy Dragon Shrimp, a food item that Iโm assured contains no actual dragon), the server is to welcome them into a cool secret. Their official, handbook-mandated line? โThese items arenโt on the menu for this promotion, but I would be happy to make an exception for you.โ
Itโs like they say, โthe exception is the rule.โ Except literally, and by mandate. Servers are required by corporate policy to act like you and they are cheating the system, in hopes that when you remember the night you rode the dragon (shrimp), you remember it not as a conspiracy-of-one, but a sneaky secret between you and your best friend (Red Lobster restaurants, a subsidiary of the Thai Union Seafood Company).
This is not a new psychological trick. Itโs a classic low stakes confidence game. The most effective way to a mark is to convince them that they are, in fact, in on the con themselves. Itโs the same move that car salesmen use when they leave the room to โtalk to their managerโ before returning with a report that โhe didnโt want me to give you this deal, butโฆโ
Itโs still striking, though, to see the strategy laid out in grandiose internal strategy documents. A beleaguered but iconic American brand name, flailing for its survival, hedges its survival on two bets. First, that you are tired, angry and aware that youโre on the wrong side of a rigged game (correct). And second, that, by offering you a facsimile of camaraderie and a very real pile of seafood, that they can win your loyalty (huh).
โ[This is] about more than just shrimp,โ the document proclaims. An absolute work of art, that sentence.
โ[Itโs] about creating an experience that says, โWe listen to you.โ
โWhen guests see Endless Shrimp back on the menu, they feel heard and valued.โ
I have never addressed a sit-down chainโs internal strategy document, but Iโm sure I speak for all of us when I say, tears in my eyes: Red Lobster, thank you. THIS is what democracy looks like.
As Eli Zeger argued in his 2020 essay about companies that talk like snarky teens on social media, this particular iteration of the โbrand as friendโ canard is the product of the marriage of late stage capitalism (and its reliance on the selling of โideasโ rather than goods and services) and the post-Citizen United codification of corporate personhood. Red Lobster isnโt a restaruant anymore. Itโs your rule-breaking, shrimp loving, newly empathetic pal. It sees you. In fact, it is the only one who see you. It gets that youโre broke, but more so that youโre alone. Itโs no longer offering you cheap shrimp (the price tag for the promotion has risen markedly since its last iteration). Itโs promising you something more importantโ belonging, connection, a port in the storm of alienation and precarity weโre all weathering.
Red Lobsterโs friendship?
โEndlessโ
Or thatโs the idea at least. Apparently, the promotion hasnโt been as lucrative as the company had hoped, at least so far. Itโs not 2016 anymore. Weโre seeking something more these days. Bread and roses? Perhaps, but definitely not just shrimp.
But Red Lobster isnโt alone, in surveying a landscape of mass alienation (economic, relational, spiritual) and seeing a business opportunity. Advertising agencies are publishing unironic blogs chillingly titled โthe loneliness crisis: how brands can step up?โ Silicon Valleyโs greatest minds heard that you wanted community and responded with sycophantic AI chatbots. Apparently, our tech overlordsโ understanding of human relationships is a robot who agrees with you all the time, including when you muse about harming yourself. Even the outright scammers get it. Gone are the days of far flung princes offering you a financial windfall. As you may have experienced personally, the hot new con isโฆ pretending to be an acquaintance and inviting you to a party.
This is a step beyond the classic commodification funnel, as documented in nineties leftist classics like No Logo and The Conquest of Cool. The brands are no longer promising a great deal, or even hipness. Whatโs on offer now is the dream of a welcoming community, one deep enough to solve for the isolation that the companies themselves helped create.
Thatโs very depressing, of course, both the reminder that our economy has always been built on the exploitation of vulnerability, and the reality that thereโs just so much more vulnerability to be exploited at this particular moment.
But thereโs another truth, not a counterpoint, but a complement. How fortunate, for those of us who actually want to connect with other human beings, rather than just make a quick buck off of them. We already have what every corporation in the world wishes they hadโ the fact that, when we offer a space by our side, to either a stranger or a friend, we actually mean it. Weโre not trying to trick you into springing for a Main Deck Margarita Flight to go along with your shrimp. Weโre not trying to mine your data or add you to a marketing funnel or load you up with debt and junk. We just think this world would be more navigable together rather than apart.
And as an organizing opportunity? From union drives to neighbor-to-neighbor activism to the precious few political campaigns that care more about building community than personal brand building? My goodness. Why do you keep hearing about neighborism these days, and not just from true believers like me? Because more people are admitting every day how hungry they are for connection, and then taking the risk of making an offering.
The terrible news right now is that the hucksters are going to keep selling us a flim flam simulacra of belonging. Yes, the consultants, but also (I fear) the politicians. I strongly suspect the 2028 Democratic primary to feature a million text messages about โneighborsโ and โcommunityโ penned by a well-heeled K-Street consultants. But the good news is that we arenโt that dumb. We know the brands arenโt our friends. Weโve lived through the great social media con together. We know what the lie looks like, and now weโd much prefer the deeply imperfect, thoroughly messy alternative.
Theyโll offer us endless shrimp. And weโll say no thank you. Weโd prefer each other, please. Even if thatโs not on the secret menu. (snip-end notes, the Boss, and general other stuff on the page)








