Dudum Clarifies Comments

Andrew Dudum, the CEO of telehealth company Hims & Hers, is facing backlash after expressing his desire to hire students who protested against Israel on college campuses. On May 3, Dudum made a social media post on X (formerly Twitter) stating that he would be willing to employ students who participated in such protests and faced disciplinary action from their universities. He framed the act as “moral courage” greater than a “college degree” and encouraged protesters to continue their activism, linking the post to the company’s job openings.

The controversy surrounding Dudum’s statements stems from concerns about the nature of these protests and the potential for violence, antisemitism, and intimidation. Protests against Israel on college campuses have often been linked to hateful rhetoric and actions, causing outrage among many stakeholders. This outrage was reflected in the stock market, as Hims & Hers stock fell 8% on May 3, wiping out nearly $210 million in market value in a matter of hours according to The New York Post.

In response to the negative reaction, Dudum attempted to clarify his stance, saying that his remarks had been “misconstrued.” He wrote that he does not support violence, antisemitism, or intimidation and that his support was for peaceful protest, which he believes is vital for democracy. Dudum also acknowledged his Palestinian roots and the trauma experienced by Palestinian refugees, while expressing his solidarity with Holocaust survivors in his family. However, these attempts at nuance were not enough to stem the tide of criticism.

Piers Morgan, a prominent figure in media and frequent critic of divisive statements, wrote an opinion piece in the New York Post criticizing Dudum’s remarks as morally bankrupt. Morgan pointed to instances where anti-Israel protesters displayed banners calling for “intifada” and exhibited violent intent during demonstrations, making it clear that Dudum’s statements were not simply about supporting peaceful protest. Morgan argued that Dudum’s decision to align himself with these protesters displayed a lack of genuine moral courage and a two-faced approach to the conflict.

But Morgan’s criticism was not the only response to Dudum’s statements. Some have also come to his defense, arguing that his statements were taken out of context and that he was simply expressing his belief in the right to peaceful protest. In his initial post, Dudum did not mention any support for violence or antisemitism, and his clarifications have reiterated that he does not condone any form of hate or intimidation.

Despite these clarifications, the damage was already done. Many investors and customers viewed Dudum’s initial comments as a blatant endorsement of divisive and violent activism, causing the company’s stock to continue to suffer. This backlash highlights the importance of thoughtful and responsible communication, especially for public figures and leaders of companies. Dudum’s statements had a significant impact on the company’s market value, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of the potential consequences of one’s words and actions.

Previous Protests Continue At MIT As Deadline Approaches
Next Former Journalist Comments On Dinner Party