It can't, because if the point is that Nike truly cared about standing behind Kaepernick, then they should have stood by him during his original endorsement deal instead of basically putting him in marketing purgatory for two years, and mulling over his extensions. Yes, I'm well aware of Kaepernick's performance in the NFL and how that would warrant a global brand having second thoughts, but they did what other companies and the NFL did, and basically caved when it came to Kaepernick's protests causing controversy.
In fact, Nike had no problems standing behind Tiger Woods during the time that his sex scandals were revealed to the public, AND after his DUI crime. They had no problems keeping Kobe Bryant's endorsement deal intact during the time that he was accused of raping a woman. It's only when Kaepernick stood up for what he believed in, that Nike had second thoughts instead of doing what they did with their marquee guys, and they had far worse image problems than Kaepernick did. The fact that it took Adidas and Puma knocking on the door speaks for itself.
Do they? From talking heads on news media to people ITT, I've seen a lot of praise for Nike while ignoring some of the more problematic context behind this deal as well as how Nike treated Kaepernick in relation to how they treat their other marquee players. In fact, I don't see a lot of people bringing up the hypocrisy of Nike using social justice as a marketing tool when they are responsible for the crap they inflict on poor countries by exploiting their cheap labour.