Tweet
Update: Orion45 provided a link to a Huffington Post article, entitled Target Political Giving ‘A Debacle’ Says Target Institutional Investor. From that article:
Target gave $150,000 and Best Buy $100,000 to a business-focused political fund helping a conservative Republican gubernatorial candidate in Minnesota, triggering a national backlash from gay rights groups and liberals…The candidate, state legislator Tom Emmer, opposes gay marriage and other rights for same-sex couples.“A good corporate political contribution policy should prevent the kind of debacle Target and Best Buy walked into,” said Trillium vice president Shelley Alpern. “We expect companies to evaluate candidates based upon the range of their positions – not simply one area – and assess whether they are in alignment with their core values. But these companies’ policies are clearly lacking that.”
The shareholders said the donations don’t mesh with corporate values that include workplace protections for gay employees and risk harming the companies’ brands. Walden senior vice president Tim Smith said such giving can have “a major negative impact on company reputations and business.”
The Target resolution urges the board to review the effect of future political contributions on the company’s public image, sales and profitability and to consider the cost of backing a candidate whose politics conflict with the company’s public stances.
So one of Target’s and Best Buy’s institutional investors thinks these were ungood political donations. It’s hard to disagree with that opinion given the “core values” reasoning why the donations were not good donations; hard to disagree with that opinion given the fallout from the donations.
From the Washington Blade‘s Boycott takes aim at Target stores:
Gay shoppers boycotting Target for supporting an anti-gay Minnesota gubernatorial candidate have little reason to rethink their stance as the company, the nation’s second largest retailer behind Wal-Mart, has done little in response.
Target’s negotiations with the Human Rights Campaign ended abruptly this week with the gay civil rights group releasing a statement saying Target would “take no corrective actions to repair the harm that it caused” through its political donation.
Based in Minnesota, Target has been pressured for three weeks by LGBT activists to make amends after giving $150,000 to MN Forward, a group that has run ads supporting Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer. A straight father of seven, Emmer is against same-sex marriage and supports constitutional amendments that outlaw it.
…More than 250,000 signatures have been collected from people pledging not to shop at Target again until the company promises to stop making political donations, MoveOn.org says. Protestors have reportedly appeared at 1,100 Target stores across the country…
Perhaps I was too early in saying I’d again shop at Target due to their apology, as Target isn’t seeming to fully grasp why their $150K donation supporting an anti-LGBT candidate was so cruel to LGBT community…a community the corporation states it strongly supports.
It appears to me that Target is really not that interested in our lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer community’s pink dollars. That kinda stinks, actually.
~~~~~
Related:
* Target Apologizes For Emmer Donation
* Avoiding Target When I Need New Hangers And Vacuum Cleaner Bags
24 Comments
Shop Mom & PopTarget's apology was insufficient. Even if their apology to the LGBTIQA community was sincere, they should also apologize for the anti-worker, anti-tax, anti-middle class problems with their donation. If you can (and I realize alternate choices are not available to everyone), please shop local mom & pop shops.
Even more important LARGE STOCKHOLDERS are furious about donations.Here this from "TARGET Political Giving a DEBACLE! say Insitutional Investors."
No I can continue Boycott…at least through November!
DON’T FORGET THE CON ARTISTS AT HRC….
After Signorile nailed an HRC rep’s lying dick to a chair yesterday after he claimed they weren’t still promoting Target in their Buyer’s Guide, HRC just released a statement about Target and Best Buy that claims they’re going to update it soon, blah blah BUT it ends with this:
TRANSLATION: They won’t DISCOURAGE people from shopping with them either aka HRC is NOT supporting the boycott.
The Hilary Rosen Champagne Fund – still frauds after all these years.
BOYCOTT TARGET AND BEST BUY! BOYCOTT HRC!
Here we go down the HRC-bashing path — again.HRC could have release a statement saying that they support people’s boycotting efforts — and it still wouldn’t be enough for you.
Do you even know what the Corporate Equality Index is? How it’s compiled? What the questions are? The scoring criteria?
Getting a 100% score is no easy feat — which is why Target & Best Buy are in a hotter seat right now than if their employment policies weren’t LGBT-inclusive. Would anyone be batting an eye if Walmart (40%) gave $$ to MN Forward?
Okay, before we go too much further down the Ad Hominem path……let’s remember that personal, ad hominem attacks on peer blenders are frowned on here at Pam’s House Blend — those are not okay, and are considered violations of the Pam’s House Blend Terms And Conditions Of Service.
Apologies and duly noted.I would like, however, for there to be some effort to keep the conversation “reality based”…
I’ll be the first to admit HRC (or GLAAD, or NGLTF, or LGBT-organization du jour) isn’t perfect and needs to be held accountble… but there’s got to be a better more civil way than the constant ad hominem attacks that go way beyond bloggy snark.
Yes, thank you….
I’ve been studying the CEI for several years now. Scoring criteria #6 is:
Employer exhibits responsible behavior toward the LGBT community; does not engage in action that would undermine LGBT equality. Employers found engaging in activities that would will have 15 points removed from their scores.
Even IF there was no evidence of Target having engaged in such activity before [which others claim there were, and is questionable in any case given HRC's history of ignoring such actions by the Coors family when it was still a standalone company], HRC is aware of it now, and could easily update such information. For instance, all that would be required would be inserting a new first page in the PDF of the 2010 CEI linked to on the HRC site that explains the controversy.
Their damage control action today, as noted, devolves directly from Signorile refusing to swallow the slimy spin of highly-paid HRC VP Fred Sainz. Passage:
Note, Sainz apparently isn’t even aware of rating criteria #6.
And, now, they’re pretending to be doing the right thing when all they’re really doing is being the gay Switzerland, taking no side at all.
QuandryI have been unemployed essentially since February 1, 2008. This week, I started training for a new job (finally!). While I will be working AT Best Buy stores, I am working FOR another company as their in-store product ambassador. I support the boycott against Target and Best Buy in principle, but there is no chance of me turning down this job, people. I need to eat. Sorry.
Jenny
PS – IMHO, the best thing to ever come out of HRC is their Workplace Project. Everything else is, well, can you say bovine fecal matter?
Be gentle with yourself, Jenny
Most of us are faced with difficult choices at various times in our lives.
The guide is to do what you have to, without hurting others, to survive to another day when you can more directly change things.
May all your cups be full.
I get youMy husband lost his job two years ago, and he’s gone back to school to train as an RN. I’m working for a company that made the conscious and deliberate choice to discriminate against us and our marriage, taking advantage of the loophole DOMA provides. It grates on me every day that my work, my knowledge, is benefiting this company. But I’m the only one employed in our household, and the bills have to be paid. So I suck it up and do my job and bring home the money to pay the bills. And I channel that frustration into more determination to get DOMA repealed, and rip that fig leaf away from this company I work for.
Criteria #6 is by it’s very nature subjectiveAnd is known informally as the “ExxonMobil” clause.
When Exxon bought Mobil, Mobil had non-discrimination policies covering sexual orientation and provided domestic partner benefits. Exxon rescinded those policies — and has publicly fought against efforts to have those policies changed. This clause was added to ensure that Exxon would get a score of zero based on the answers in the other 5 criteria areas.
A couple of points:
First — as to Target and Best Buy’s current scores, they are based on what was submitted in the Spring of 2009. I am quite sure that whatever they submitted this year, the current situation will be part of their score that will be announced in September.
Second — corporate political donations have not, until recently, been an issue. The focus has been almost entirely workplace policies & practices, benefits parity, diversity & inclusion efforts and marketing & community engagement. That’s probably because the HRC Foundation — which is the 501c3 non-profit, education arm of HRC — runs the CEI.
So, what to do.
1. There are currently several efforts underway to review and potentially add specific questions on political activities to the CEI for the 2012 cycle. (Bearing in mind that the 2011 survey is now complete.)
2. The 2011 CEI scores currently being compiled will make note of the controversy and likely take points away.
This issue isn’t simply as cut and dry as everyone would like it to be. Companies give $$ to politicians of every stripe based on a whole range of reasons — mostly tied to (at least rationalized to) core business activities. How do you tally things up? Does a donation to LGBT-friendly Speaker Pelosi mean more points than a back-bencher anti-gay from Idaho? Do you also look at employee contributions? Marriott has a 100% rating, but it’s owned by Mormons who’s hands aren’t clean from Prop 8.
I think we all would benefit from some objective criteria in the mix — and not just the old definition of obscenity (I’ll know it when I see it) — if we also want to encourage the “right” behavior by corporations.
In the mean time, let’s keep the focus on the real bad actors in all this: Target & Best Buy who, through their actions, have called into question their LGBT-inclusion bone fides.
HRC to remove Target and Best Buy from Buyer’s GuideAccording to both Towleroad and Joe.My.God, Target is going to remove Target and Best buy from the next edition of the Buyers guide, which is based on CEI scores.
Here’s the text of the HRC press release as reported by Joe:
As noted in my first comment above…Please read the last line of their statement carefully:
TRANSLATION: They won’t DISCOURAGE people from shopping with them either = HRC is trying to be a kind of gay Switzerland, refusing to take a side, implying that it’s perfectly fine for “consumers” to keep putting money into the pockets of a corporation who [along with its CEO & his wife personally] put money into the pockets of a rabidly antigay politician who put money into the pockets of a rabidly antigay “Christian” band whose leader said “On average, [gays] molest 117 people before they’re found out.” = HRC is NOT supporting the boycott.
BOYCOTT TARGET AND BEST BUY! BOYCOTT HRC!
Issues good, personal bad.Your viewpoints are perfectly fine to express.
As we say in the TOS (emphasis added):
Ad hominem falls under harmful. Taking a contrary opinion that is respectful of the community identities of others in our comment threads — that is perfectly within the TOS rules, and welcome here.
In other words, as a reminder for others reading this in our comment threads, it’s about civil discourse here in the comment threads here at PHB.
Think of this as a virtual LGBTQ coffee house. WAs we sip our virtual coffee or tea around the virtual coffee house table, we can strongly disagree with each other — but we want to be able to come back as friends when on another day we meet at the virtual table and discuss issues over more virtual cups of coffee or tea. =)
Okay, I’ll shut up now. =) Back to the discussions at hand.
Nothing I Want To BuyTarget has not stocked or carried anything I wanted to buy in years. I occasionally would stop in to look for one item, but Target had stopped carrying it years ago. So, I don’t even think of them as a possible shopping location anymore.
Best Buy is another story. I’m almost stuck here. Where I live has very few electronics stores. Quite a distance away is a Micro Center, but getting there can be a problem. Fortunately I don’t need many things from them anymore.
So, two more accounts of the gAYTm are closed.
Subjective, my ass! You’re being disingenous….AT BEST.
You’ve simply redrawn your insulting, bullying tactic of, “You don’t know what you’re talking about,” another way, and are acting as if this is no more important than someone picking up the wrong fork at one of their banquets.
Its origin is beside the point. Its language is unequivocal. It does not say, “engage in action that would undermine LGBT equality” EXCEPT FOR HELPING ELECT BIGOTS…THAT’S OKAY. That you can parrot HRC’s assertion that it was never meant to include consideration of political donations is indefensible for the group that has anointed itself, “America’s largest civil rights organization working to achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) equality.”
Are we to believe you and they believe civil rights grow on trees?
They’re paid some pretty big bucks to avoid such allged crucial “ooopsies.”
And that you can even rhetorically posit,
is insufferable on its face, as is your implication that HRC can do no wrong.
As noted, they can and have. For years they gave 100% ratings to Coors even as it was widely known that several of its family members were taking some of the profits they made and giving them not just to anti LGBT politicians [including their own Pete Coors when he ran for US Senate himself on a platform that included an amendment to the US Constitution banning marriage equality] but to some of the most influential and viciously anti LGBT rights orgs such as the Heritage Foundation [upon whose board Holly Coors sat] and the Castle Rock Foundation [whose board is still made up mostly of Coors family members].
And, no, Marriott should NOT have a 100% rating IF its owners and/or officers can be shown to have donated to anti-LGBT politicians or orgs.
But back to Target. You claim not to work for HRC but you certainly could given your gift for self-serving parsing which is one of their hallmarks, e.g., attempting to change the subject from Emmer, a high-profile, rabidly anti-LGBT state representive and the Repug party’s candidate for governor of Minnesota to “a back-bencher anti-gay from Idaho.”
Let’s recap.
EMMER not only wants to ban marriage equality in the state constitution, not only was against helping gay couples create families with surrogacy, but voted against the Final Wishes bill which would provide same-sex partners the automatic right to control their partner’s remains after death, eliminating the need for costly and ineffective legal documents to ensure the right to make after-death decisions, and allow a surviving same-sex partner to sue the person responsible for a wrongful death, such as a drunken driver, to recover medical and funeral expenses.
Not only did Target give $150,000 to the group supporting him, but Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel and his wife each personally donated as much directly to his campaign as state law allows [$2300 each].
One is sure the Steihafel’s would claim, as he has about the corporate donation, it had nothing to do with Emmer’s homohatred, but because they believe he would be better for businesses.
But, even if true, it’s irrelevant. A line MUST be drawn somewhere, a line of ZERO TOLERANCE, if not by them then at least, again, by the group that asks and accepts tens of millions of dollars in LGBT donations to FIGHT for our civil rights.
How much of the Steinhafels’ personal donations were a part of the $250 Emmer’s campaign donated to the rabidly antigay “Christian punk rock group” YCR whom he describes as “nice people” even after their lead said on his radio program:
Finally, even if one could give HRC a pass for failing for years to bring simple integrity to the CEI and Buyers Guide, their REFUSAL to support the boycott IN THIS MOMENT is indefensible.
Geography/transportation can be a problem…
For those who haven’t explored them previousl, I urge you to check out online shopping with Amazon. While I, too, mourn how many independent bookstores they’ve been the death knell for, they have also a huge electronics inventory; pricing, is of course, extremely competitive, and regular shipping for most purchases over $25 is free.
[For the record, I don't know what their history of political donations are.]
But I do know Costco’s are excellent. While they carry a much narrow line of products online, their prices are also great, and shipping is often included. One could easily make back the annual membership fee just in savings on things purchased online without ever stepping in one of their brick and mortar warehouses.
I read Autumn’s admonitionSo I will disengage from this thread rather than respond.
Target also has stated for a long time on their web site……that diversity will be a major consideration in every area of their business.
Apparently that did not really work out too well with the MNforward deal; that puts their entire commitment to diversity into question — at least in my mind.
I think they were really hollow words, diversity is chic and Target has just been riding a cardboard bandwagon, nothing of any real substance there, it’s been pretty window dressing all along. A companies real footprint in this world reflects that of its leader, and that leader (in Target’s case) is giving HIS OWN money to Michell Bachmann and Tom Emmer, and other racists and bigots. With Target, in other words, the apple does not fall far from the tree, and that is only natural and expected. They kept up a good front for quite a while, but it has collapsed like the house of cards it was.
Personally, I’m very gratified that you may be reconsidering your opinion to shop at Target, Autumn. My heart sank a wee bit on your last post on the subject when you said you might shop there again, but I didn’t say anything, because I know from all your writings what a really wonderful person you are — in so many ways — I just knew it would work out somehow, and apparently it did — it is very heartening in a way for me that I can’t quite put into words, it’s more of a feeling really.
Hey now, let’s be fairIf it weren’t for those rabidly anti-gay politicians, there wouldn’t BE a HRC. What reason does HRC possibly have for making this easy on us when keeping everything up in the air is so much better for them?
If they really were a Human Rights Campaign, they’d have created a massive effort to uncover antiLGBT funding where ever possible once the corporate-free-speech-that-will-mostly-be-done-in-secret decision was passed down. Instead, they’ve waffled. Worse, they’ve soggy waffled. And nobody likes soggy waffles.
And by the way, everyone: Target did not apologize to us. The CEO apologized in a letter addressed to his own employees for “the way this was handled”. Bit of a difference, there.
No money for our enemies. No money for the DNC and the RNC.
No shopping at Target, Best Buy or Walmart.
No money donated to HRC, Stonewall Democrats or any Democrats, GOProud, Log Cabin or any Republicans.
Donate to real LGBT activist group like EAA, legal activist groups like Lambda or the NCLR, student activists like GSA’s or GLSEN, HIV/AIDS support and activist groups or to help our brothers and sisters in Uganda, Iraq and Iran.
Are the Stonewallers really on the enemy list?Maybe I just don’t know enough about them, but they are always sending requests not just for money but for organizing phonebanking and volunteer support of pro-equality candidates, and they were especially active it seemed like with electing Annise Parker who according to wikipedia “Parker is Houston’s second female mayor, and the first openly gay mayor of a U.S. city with over a million residents”
“On December 12, 2009, Parker made history when she was elected mayor of America’s fourth largest city.[14] When she assumed office on January 2, 2010, Houston became the largest U.S. city to ever have an openly gay individual serve as mayor.[15]”
I guess I’ve just tended to file organizations like Stonewall along with the Victory Fund and others that focus on pro-equality & openly LGBT candidates.
Is that not the case?
My IMPRESSION is Stonewallersare Democrats first, LGBT second. Can’t really cite a smoking gun, but my impression is given a choice between calling out a Democrat who stand in our way, they’d rather just point to the GOP, and declare they are the problem.
As though there isn’t a problem ENDA’s gone nowhere after two years of supermajority Congressional Dem control and a “supportive” White House.
Our problems as a community aren’t only with the GOP, as we can see by the slow glacial pace of progress.
Clarknt67 (below) is right.Democrat and Republican officeholders and candidates, in spite of their lies, are defined by their party. Democrats are defined by their support for DOMA and DADT (including the anti-LGBT DADT compromise) and their refusal to pass ENDA. Theyre defined by being in a party run by a bigot named Obama and by Congressional bigot panderers in Congress.
Stonewall didn’t attack Obama for ‘gawd’s in the mix’ and they initially opposed the March on Wahsington.
Attacking the Republicans as bigots is 100% on the mark, but refusing to attack Democrats for the same crimes is shameless partisanship that puts the interests of the Democrat party above the interests of LGBT folks.
On November 2nd. 2010 vote for a leftist party or just sit it out.
On November 4th, 2012 vote for a leftist party or just sit it out.
(Unless there are important propositions or initiatives like prop 19 in California on the ballot.)