Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We went straight from a thread of people using every excuse in the book to deny it was racism. A thread were people were mocked for wanting to boycott Starbucks.
To a new thread were the company acknowledged it was racism, and will take the extraordinary step to close business for a day to try and fix the problem.
The same people who were saying it wasn't racism, are now furious, threatening to boycott the company. Saying that Starbucks has no clue how to run a business.
You know what we haven't seen from the people all about 'Personal Responsibility?' We haven't seen one person admitting they were wrong.
As our fat president would say; SAD!
I'm, for all practical purposes, 'boycotting' Starbucks right now....but it started more than a week before this incident happened, and is completely unrelated.
It hasn't garnered even one one-hundredth the publicity the Philadelphia incident has, but Starbucks had a significant (to some) policy change on April first...4/1/2018.
I noticed the change on 4/4/2018...my first post 3/31/2018 visit.
You used to be able to open your browser, which would bring up the Starbucks home page, and click on connect. You would then be connected to the internet. This changed on 4/1/2018. With the first attempted log on 4/1/2018 +, one is greeted with a different screen that requires your first and last names (probably no way to check against nonsense names), an e-mail address, a phone number (probably doesn't check against a nonsense number), and a zip code. Also included is an explanation that you will just need to provide this one time, and then that device will always be recognized. I was able to click on both the privacy policy and the terms of service. I read both in detail...reading both for the first time. I've essentially been burying my head in the sand for as long as google has been providing Starbucks wi-fi service . Google can plot every use of Starbucks wi-fi on any particular device of mine. Commercial use is being made of information obtained, and reading the TOS and the privacy policy in tandem makes that clear...no bones are being made about that. Within the last couple of years, I saw a tag line that read (I'm paraphrasing) 'Starbucks is a technology company masquerading as a coffee company' in the table of contents of a magazine at an airport....but I didn't have time to read the article...I had to catch my flight.
^^^^^ Sorry...I'm ending my use of wi-fi at Starbucks. If I know I won't need wi-fi during a visit, I'm open to going there, but those visits will be sporadic. I have a smart phone, but I intentionally don't have a data plan. I'm contemplating getting a cellular enabled 12.9" iPad Pro. If I eventually do that, I'll often use a VPN, and might return to spending more time at Starbucks. I checked Panera and they are, IMO, worse. Panera is also frank about commercializing your habits, but they don't reveal who their partner is (Starbucks identifies Google)...only referring to their partner as 'a third party'. McDonalds, Barnes and Noble, and Whole Foods (at least the ones I have tested in the last week) still have the same old school policies they have had for years...not having converted to technologies that Starbucks, for instance, describes within their aforementioned online 'policy papers'.
I don't think race played a factor either. It has to do with using the bathroom without being a customer. Personally I think businesses who sell to the public should offer their restroom. I have been a tourist at many quaint shopping villages and over and over again have been refused the ability to use restroom facilities because I hadn't bought something. "No public restroom" the sign says. Many of these places only has a public restroom blocks away and it can be hard for kids and women to hold it.
I have told than one shopkeeper, "I know you don't want strangers using your restroom, but if you were open to it, you would get more sales." People who are walking around in a bad mood with their legs crossed don't want to shop; they're angry at store owners' stingy attitude and searching for a place to use the bathroom. I never went back and shopped at a store that refused me when I asked to go. As for the Starbucks thing, I've used their facilities a couple of times when I hadn't bought a drink. I never asked for permission to use their facilities. I just went whether I bought a drink or not.
Except that some people are saying that white people who haven't purchased anything have been given the bathroom code at that Starbucks.
Often, these types of corporate training are so they can "check the box" that they did something should a law suit come up. They are doing this at the recommendation of their lawyers.
It's all B.S. of course. I've been through them, and they are a HUGE waste of time, and money.
“Suspiciously Black in Starbucks
Starbucks doesn't need to close its stores for bias trainings. It needs to change its entire design so that it doesn’t merely reflect the character of host neighborhoods, especially if that character is racist.”
LOL, the damage is already done. Once you are tried and convicted by the social media justice system, there is no forgiveness. The CEO can apologize all he wants. He could shut the stores down for a month. He could give the young men large checks, and it still won't repair the damage to their reputation.
Just out of curiosity how would YOU handle a situation like this?
Really, the only issue I'm 100% on board with is when asked to leave the men should have left. The manager was speaking on behalf of the property owner and when they didn't leave they broke the cardinal rule of life: the non-aggression principle (by trespassing on private property).
But was the 'property owner' violating the public accommodations part of the 1964 Civil Rights Act ?
I'm headed for the local Ruth's Chris Steakhouse, find a nice table, and just sit for a couple of hours. But since I'm an old white guy, I'll be in jail tomorrow....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. Google can plot every use of Starbucks wi-fi on any particular device of mine. Commercial use is being made of information obtained, and reading the TOS and the privacy policy in tandem makes that clear...no bones are being made about that. Within the last couple of years, I saw a tag line that read (I'm paraphrasing) 'Starbucks is a technology company masquerading as a coffee company' in the table of contents of a magazine at an airport....but I didn't have time to read the article...I had to catch my flight.
?
