Starbucks: Race Together?

[fairsheet]

The following link goes to background, as opposed to any sort of specific endorsement or critique of the piece.....

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2015/03/23/3704574/starbucks-schultz-perhaps-tone.html

This Starbucks thing was perhaps, bigger news hereabouts since this is the home of Starbucks. Although....you should know that since he sold our Sonics to the Okies, Schultz isn't exactly some sort of local hero. Anyway...when this "race together" silliness was first announced (all best intentions aside) it sounded sort of silly to me. It sounds even more silly today, than it did a week ago.

BUT...that it appears to've generated a relative firestorm of NEGativity? I'm not gettin' that. Starbuck's market clearly has too much time and money on its hands. But then...so do those who're apparently taken aback at this silliness.

 

[Jen]

The following link goes to background, as opposed to any sort of specific endorsement or critique of the piece.....

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2015/03/23/3704574/starbucks-schultz-perhaps-tone.html

This Starbucks thing was perhaps, bigger news hereabouts since this is the home of Starbucks. Although....you should know that since he sold our Sonics to the Okies, Schultz isn't exactly some sort of local hero. Anyway...when this "race together" silliness was first announced (all best intentions aside) it sounded sort of silly to me. It sounds even more silly today, than it did a week ago.

BUT...that it appears to've generated a relative firestorm of NEGativity? I'm not gettin' that. Starbuck's market clearly has too much time and money on its hands. But then...so do those who're apparently taken aback at this silliness.

One of my sons works in the Starbuck's corporate offices in Seattle..........but he's in properties, not public relations. Had he been part of the decision that would have had Starbucks stores talk about race relations with the public, I would have had this to say to him: Talking about race relations in an attempt to bring people together is a noble idea. But expecting baristas on a local level to be able to have that conversation with people is too much to expect. It's not an easy conversation and it's full of potential pitfalls. Just look at all the booby traps Obama and Holder (assuming they wanted to unite, not divide) stepped into. How could a barista be expected to have a deep psychological conversation with someone..........say, in the morning while handing them their coffee?

I have seen Starbucks stores in Seattle that might be conducive to that sort of conversation. That Teavana Starbucks store in the U District of Seattle (went there with my son when it first opened.... he scoped it out and identified himself later) was great and would certainly be a place for a good conversation on race.

But the local Starbucks stores around the country?
Nope.
That's just not going to work.
Just mvho.
Seems we agree on this one, fairsheet. And lucky you........being in Seattle. And do check out Teavana if you are in the U District. It was amazing.

 

[fairsheet]

One of my sons works in the Starbuck's corporate offices in Seattle..........but he's in properties, not public relations. Had he been part of the decision that would have had Starbucks stores talk about race relations with the public, I would have had this to say to him: Talking about race relations in an attempt to bring people together is a noble idea. But expecting baristas on a local level to be able to have that conversation with people is too much to expect. It's not an easy conversation and it's full of potential pitfalls. Just look at all the booby traps Obama and Holder (assuming they wanted to unite, not divide) stepped into. How could a barista be expected to have a deep psychological conversation with someone..........say, in the morning while handing them their coffee?

I have seen Starbucks stores in Seattle that might be conducive to that sort of conversation. That Teavana Starbucks store in the U District of Seattle (went there with my son when it first opened.... he scoped it out and identified himself later) was great and would certainly be a place for a good conversation on race.

But the local Starbucks stores around the country?
Nope.
That's just not going to work.
Just mvho.
Seems we agree on this one, fairsheet. And lucky you........being in Seattle. And do check out Teavana if you are in the U District. It was amazing.

You're suggesting that the idea was ill-conceived. I agree. I had trouble figuring it out when it was first announced. I guess what I'm having trouble figuring out, is why it apparently made some people angry.

I like pondering the automotive market and its advertising. One margue's (Nissan's) advertising tends to come across as curiously pathetic to me, in a lot of instances. I mean...don't people get paid big bucks for this stuff? But hey....what do I care if Nissan throws good advertising money after bad?

 

[Jen]

You're suggesting that the idea was ill-conceived. I agree. I had trouble figuring it out when it was first announced. I guess what I'm having trouble figuring out, is why it apparently made some people angry.

I like pondering the automotive market and its advertising. One margue's (Nissan's) advertising tends to come across as curiously pathetic to me, in a lot of instances. I mean...don't people get paid big bucks for this stuff? But hey....what do I care if Nissan throws good advertising money after bad?

It was ill-conceived, and I agree with you again...........no reason for people to get angry about it. It was just something that couldn't work.

 

[connieb]

The following link goes to background, as opposed to any sort of specific endorsement or critique of the piece.....

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2015/03/23/3704574/starbucks-schultz-perhaps-tone.html

This Starbucks thing was perhaps, bigger news hereabouts since this is the home of Starbucks. Although....you should know that since he sold our Sonics to the Okies, Schultz isn't exactly some sort of local hero. Anyway...when this "race together" silliness was first announced (all best intentions aside) it sounded sort of silly to me. It sounds even more silly today, than it did a week ago.

BUT...that it appears to've generated a relative firestorm of NEGativity? I'm not gettin' that. Starbuck's market clearly has too much time and money on its hands. But then...so do those who're apparently taken aback at this silliness.

This is just classic lefty. They think that because people tolerate their hippy dippy kumby-a nonsense, that they actually like it and are on board with it.


They think they are popular because they have taken all these far left wing causes. Instead of recognizing that they are popular despite that nonsense.

So, they pushed the envelope just a little too far this time. And, it has come to bite them on the ass.

Deservedly so. Anyone who thinks the person willing to shell out $5 for a cup of coffee, wants to hear any lip about race, from the faceless doof behind the counter - is a fool.


connie

 

[oicu812]

starbucks want to discuss race relations with who?

other liberal whites?

you cant go to starbucks in selma,,or ferguson, or any of the surrounding areas...
there aren't any..

same for most predominatley black cities..

no starbucks,,no starbucks jobs,,no starbucks revenue,,no starbucks nothin...

its most likely a wise business decision,,not to service those areas...
a busload of reasons...

howver,,its hypocritical at best..."people who live in glass houses,,shouldnt throw stones"

 

[marvin martian]

This is just classic lefty. They think that because people tolerate their hippy dippy kumby-a nonsense, that they actually like it and are on board with it.


They think they are popular because they have taken all these far left wing causes. Instead of recognizing that they are popular despite that nonsense.

So, they pushed the envelope just a little too far this time. And, it has come to bite them on the ass.

Deservedly so. Anyone who thinks the person willing to shell out $5 for a cup of coffee, wants to hear any lip about race, from the faceless doof behind the counter - is a fool.


connie

By the way, there are no Starbucks shops in Ferguson, MO, Highland Park (Detroit), MI or Selma, AL. Why not?

 

[Jen]

By the way, there are no Starbucks shops in Ferguson, MO, Highland Park (Detroit), MI or Selma, AL. Why not?

My guess, marvin, is that there are not enough people in those areas you mentioned to spring .......daily.......... for one or more $5.00+ cup of coffee.

 

[fairsheet]

This is just classic lefty. They think that because people tolerate their hippy dippy kumby-a nonsense, that they actually like it and are on board with it.


They think they are popular because they have taken all these far left wing causes. Instead of recognizing that they are popular despite that nonsense.

So, they pushed the envelope just a little too far this time. And, it has come to bite them on the ass.

Deservedly so. Anyone who thinks the person willing to shell out $5 for a cup of coffee, wants to hear any lip about race, from the faceless doof behind the counter - is a fool.


connie

Blah-blah-blah. Howard Schultz is the opposite of a "hippy-dippy". He spun coffee into gold, for chrissakes! For what it's worth, we hippy-dippies wouldn't be caught dead sporting a Starbucks cup.

 

[connieb]

Blah-blah-blah. Howard Schultz is the opposite of a "hippy-dippy". He spun coffee into gold, for chrissakes! For what it's worth, we hippy-dippies wouldn't be caught dead sporting a Starbucks cup.

Lol. That is laughable. Their whole recycled cups and cup holders, fair trade, responsible growing, higher than minimum wage starting, employee benefit plans, etc - is the hallmark of lefty hippy -dippyism. Plenty of lefty hippy dippies manage to excel in business inspite of themselves. Starbucks is a prime example.

connie

 

[PhilFish]

This is just classic lefty. They think that because people tolerate their hippy dippy kumby-a nonsense, that they actually like it and are on board with it.


They think they are popular because they have taken all these far left wing causes. Instead of recognizing that they are popular despite that nonsense.

So, they pushed the envelope just a little too far this time. And, it has come to bite them on the ass.

Deservedly so. Anyone who thinks the person willing to shell out $5 for a cup of coffee, wants to hear any lip about race, from the faceless doof behind the counter - is a fool.


connie

Seemed like a gimmick to me. Which worked as far as grabbing attention.

What makes all the baristas doofs?

 

[connieb]

Seemed like a gimmick to me. Which worked as far as grabbing attention.

What makes all the baristas doofs?

I don't think they all are... but anyone who wanted to "have a conversation" with a random persona bout race relations, is.

connie

 

[fairsheet]

Lol. That is laughable. Their whole recycled cups and cup holders, fair trade, responsible growing, higher than minimum wage starting, employee benefit plans, etc - is the hallmark of lefty hippy -dippyism. Plenty of lefty hippy dippies manage to excel in business inspite of themselves. Starbucks is a prime example.

connie

Schultz maximizes both sides of whatever "divide" exists, and we hereabouts know it. What choice does he have? All he's got to sell is coffee?

 

[fairsheet]

Seemed like a gimmick to me. Which worked as far as grabbing attention.

What makes all the baristas doofs?

I will suggest that the baristas are one rung up on the aspiration ladder, from burger flippers. That can't alter the fact that they've still got a couple more rungs to go before society should be taking their feelings seriously.

 

[Zam-Zam]

The following link goes to background, as opposed to any sort of specific endorsement or critique of the piece.....

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2015/03/23/3704574/starbucks-schultz-perhaps-tone.html

This Starbucks thing was perhaps, bigger news hereabouts since this is the home of Starbucks. Although....you should know that since he sold our Sonics to the Okies, Schultz isn't exactly some sort of local hero. Anyway...when this "race together" silliness was first announced (all best intentions aside) it sounded sort of silly to me. It sounds even more silly today, than it did a week ago.

BUT...that it appears to've generated a relative firestorm of NEGativity? I'm not gettin' that. Starbuck's market clearly has too much time and money on its hands. But then...so do those who're apparently taken aback at this silliness.

In my humble opinion, someone serving you a beverage shouldn't be telling you what you should be discussing. It seems arrogant to me that they think that is their business.

That said, I never go into Starbucks anyway, so I don't really care what they do to their patrons. They can douse them in cow urine for all I care.

 

[fairsheet]

In my humble opinion, someone serving you a beverage shouldn't be telling you what you should be discussing. It seems arrogant to me that they think that is their business.

That said, I never go into Starbucks anyway, so I don't really care what they do to their patrons. They can douse them in cow urine for all I care.

I don't shop Starbucks either. But, neither do I give a shit about how their CEO might try marketing coffee. And for the umpteenth time, that's my gist.

 

[connieb]

Schultz maximizes both sides of whatever "divide" exists, and we hereabouts know it. What choice does he have? All he's got to sell is coffee?

Perhaps he is just playing the lefty fool to maximize both sides. And, like Phil said, just trying to stir up publicity.

But, this time he stunt seemed to cross the line of what people out side of his little circle would put up with. He over-estimated the tolerance of his audience. Upper middle class white america is sufficiently cowed when it comes to race to not fight back and even barely mount a defense against charges of "systemic racisim", "white priveledge" and is used to being continually in the position of being the "bad guy" when it comes to race relations and are generally polite enough not to say "what the hell does it matter.".. and to some extent humor lefty when it comes to pouring on the white guilt. But, a bitch fest about race, over your morning cup of joe, is really way too far.

And, I think that is what is generating the anger.


connie

 

[fairsheet]

Perhaps he is just playing the lefty fool to maximize both sides. And, like Phil said, just trying to stir up publicity.

But, this time he stunt seemed to cross the line of what people out side of his little circle would put up with. He over-estimated the tolerance of his audience. Upper middle class white america is sufficiently cowed when it comes to race to not fight back and even barely mount a defense against charges of "systemic racisim", "white priveledge" and is used to being continually in the position of being the "bad guy" when it comes to race relations and are generally polite enough not to say "what the hell does it matter.".. and to some extent humor lefty when it comes to pouring on the white guilt. But, a bitch fest about race, over your morning cup of joe, is really way too far.

And, I think that is what is generating the anger.


connie

I realize you've challenged yourself to try spinning this into some sort of whacked out blue vs. red thing, but it ain't worth the effort to me.

 

[connieb]

I realize you've challenged yourself to try spinning this into some sort of whacked out blue vs. red thing, but it ain't worth the effort to me.

I thought you wanted to know why all the negativity. I was trying to explain the perception of others of why it would be viewed as a negative thing, and yes, it comes down very much to the perceived politics of Starbucks, versus who is really their clientele.

But, sorry I didn't realize you just wanted to rant about it and not discuss the issue.

 

[PhilFish]

I don't think they all are... but anyone who wanted to "have a conversation" with a random persona bout race relations, is.

connie

don't look now but we all do it here ..regularly..


d'oh.