Technology

Only the colonists naturally.

I do think maybe it's a good idea to think about how we treat similar situations before we decide that a company should not do business with a particular ethnicity in an area.

Right wing (but not far-right) genocide defenders speak in vagueries because what they say is not compatible with the truth. It is pathetic.

Not every comparison is whataboutism.

This particular comparison is one Zionists love to make to discredit the Palestinian cause, though, so I tend to view it with suspicion. That said, with the assumption that you're talking in good faith I'll try to address your point.

This looks like more "Israel Bad" virtue signaling than it does helping Palestinians.

Boycotting settlements is one way to either strongarm the Israeli government into not expanding settlements (which make no mistake are built with their blessing) or disincentivise their expansion by making it economically disadvantageous. To quote the article:

Critics say that doing business in these areas normalises and provides revenue for these settlements. Support which has landed Airbnb on the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement's list of international companies complicit with Israeli violations of Palestinian rights.

Another quote:

Sari Bashi, programme director at Human Rights Watch, said that, in allowing properties in Israeli settlements to be listed on their sites, “Airbnb and Booking.com are contributing to land grabs, crippling movement restrictions and even the forced displacement of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, abuses that Israeli authorities commit in order to maintain oppression and domination over Palestinians as part of the crime against humanity of apartheid”.

This isn't virtue signaling; it's one of the few things someone in a Western country can do to help the Palestinian cause without getting into direct action. And how do you know it works? Because Zionists fucking hate it.

Like I said before, if a large number of Native Americans launched a credible campaign (as in one with specific, achievable goals like "we want X land for Y reservation"), they'd also be well within their rights to call for a boycott on that land until their demands are fulfilled and at least I personally would support that boycott. The logic in your comparison works, but not in the way you're implying.

Edit: Aaand no reply.