The letter would read better if it was written on stationary from Target.
This is a good point and I’m surprised I overlooked it myself. Nothing in the linked story says that employees themselves were asked to take the survey, only that companies were asked ABOUT black employees. Target’s excuse is even weaker than I thought. How does answering questions about hiring and business practices compromise the fostering of diversity in a workplace?
Go right ahead. That’ll show them, I’m sure.
I’m sure it will too. Good advise.
Well, what would you suggest, buying some propane cylinders at Target and torching the NAACP headquarters?
In any case, I thought this wasn’t about the NAACP or Target; it was taking a symbolic stand against stupidity.
No. Your idea is fine. Let the NAACP know that you’re going to keep shopping at Target. That’s exactly the right response if that’s how you feel. I just don’t think the NAACP will care very much.
I actually find myself compelled to apologize for jumping to wrong conclusion i.e. you were being sarcastic.
Far out.
The only way they wouldn’t care would be if it was a bullshit publicity stunt. If their goal were to bring harm to Target then creating a windfall for the company would be pretty stupid.
:The NAACP has graded corporations since 1997 on how well they work with blacks in employment, charitable giving, advertising, contracting and community service."
Not a far jump that if an organization grades companies on certain things, and a company then gets an F, that it is meant to imply the company failed those things. Why not just say, “refused to answer”? Why give an F that implies that the company is horrible in its “work with blacks in employment, charitable giving, advertising, contracting and community service.”?
There is a certain pattern here. If you don’t answer our survey, you get an F. So to avoid an F you must answer. When you answer, you may still get an F if you don’t give enough money, do certain things we want you to do. Take our survey and then you will know what you have to do to avoid a boycott.
I don’t blame companies for not responding. I hope more refuse to respond in the future, knowing a NAACP boycott is not based on fair conclusions.
No apology necessary. I was being a LITTLE sarcastic with “that’ll show them” but if enough people did it, it might actually get their attention. I almost always think free speech is best fought with more free speech. And showing extra support for a company when they’ve done something you approve of is a perfectly valid response. That’s how the free market is supposed to work. The business makes its decisions and the market responds. Whatever decisions cause the market to respond favorably are good business decisions and vice versa. We all know that good business decisions don’t have to be good ethical decisions and good ethical decisons can sometimes be “bad” business decisions…and in the case of the latter, that’s just how it goes. In this particular case, I think the “boycott” such as it is will have a negligable effect at best and that Target is unlikely to be injured by it.
For the record, I’m a pretty regular shopper at Target and don’t intend to stop.
That’s exactly what they did say. They said they gave Target an F BECAUSE they wouldn’t answer the survey. They didn’t conceal their reason and they didn’t make any other claims about them. How is that dishonest?
Activism run amok. Couldn’t have said it better.
It feels dishonest to me that the end result is a list of companies graded, top to bottom, on what is supposed to be a certain criteria, but then an F can be given for not answering the questions. An honest version of the the criteria would state:
“The NAACP has graded corporations since 1997 on how well they work with blacks in employment, charitable giving, advertising, contracting and community service.” And add, “and if they will participate in our survey.”
The F implies they are treating blacks poorly, etc. Otherwise they could have just listed the companies that didn’t reply and then suggest a boycott because they didn’t reply. I think that would be a more honest reflection of what the survey found.
But instead they give the F, not based on the criteria, but on going going along with NAACP. That is how I see it as dishonest.
Hmm, the story is not clear on that. I read it one way, but you may be right. I actually hope that you are, because it makes my respect for Target much stronger. If people are equal, then they are equal, nothing further need be said. Good on them for putting their money where their mouth is!
How would answering the survey make people unequal?
Not answering the survey is explicitly stated as their criterion for giving Target an F. There’s no decpetion here.
We would really have to see the the actual survey and actual letters asking for involvement to see what is what. I still think the survey is claiming to be how blacks are treated by companies, community involvement, etc, and the grade is not based on those things. They state the reason for the grade in this report, but know that won’t always be cited.
I concede this is not the best source, but it still makes my point. This is from Wikpedia on Target:
Diversity
The Target employee diversity program is called “The Power of One”. It specifically seeks to work with vendors and contractors that are minority-owned or owned by women.[33]
It is has long extended domestic partner benefits to straight, gay, and lesbian employees. It has received an 86 on the Human Rights Campaign Corporate Equality Index Score. [34] In addition, Target Corporation was named one of the “100 Best Companies for Working Mothers” in 2004 by Working Mother magazine.
Despite Target’s stated commitment to diversity, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has repeatedly given Target failing grades on its annual Economic Reciprocity Initiative report card, a measure of the company’s “commitment to the African-American citizenry”. In 2003 and 2005, the NAACP has rated Target an “F” on this report; in 2004, Target was rated a “D-”. In contrast, Wal-Mart, which scored higher than all of the other retailers on the report for 2003 and 2004, was given a “C+” for both of those years.[35]
When reported the bottom line is they were graded and they failed. No mention of why. This is what the NAACP is relying on. The bottom line report making a company look bad. They tell the companies ahead of time they will boycott them if they don’t answer, at least being honest there. But it is not fair to then still give an F for failing something they didn’t participate in.
I guess you can say Target’s refusing to answer shows its lack of “commitment to the African-American citizenry.” But I don’t think refusing to answer a survey when threatened with a boycott if you don’t, shows a lack of “commitment to the African-American citizenry,” which is what they claim the survey is.
I think is shows a desire not to be forced to do something they don’t think is in the best interest of the company, for whatever reason. And I can see how that is the case here.
We really need to see a copy of the survey. Any thoughts on how to get one?
I would bet that it works like this. You don’t answer the survey you get boycotted. You answer the survery. And if more of your money goes to just any minority, or women, which it looks like is the case for Target, then you get a bad grade.
So in order to answer the survey and not look like you treat blacks poorly, which it looks like the survey focuses on, you must make adjustments to where your charity money, employment, vender practices go.
Answering this survey could result in Target’s feeling a need to take money from their current program “Power of One,” and put more in specific programs for just blacks. So that would then make things unequal.
Again, we don’t have the actual survey, but until we do, I am pretty sure the goal of the survey is to not show what companies are currently doing, but to shape where there money will go in the future. That is fine for the NAACP to think that is a good way to accomplish their goals. But I think Target could have a point in rejecting it.
At which point does this become blackmail?
“Distribute our survey or we call for a boycott and give you a poor public rating!”
It does not become blackmail until the person.group threatening the boycott engages in a threat of violence or other illegal activity.
Given that few people are going to hear about the NAACP actions, it is a pretty toothless threat. They have been issuing these scorecards for several years without having any effect on any retailer.