Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

Hightower: Starbucks' Bizarre Branding Strategy -- Hide Its Name, Pretend to Be 'Authentic' Local Coffee Shop

By Jim Hightower, Creators Syndicate. Posted August 12, 2009.


Starbucks is now striving to be the anti-Starbucks, dressing up as funky neighborhood coffeehouses with a cool vibe.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

There's a joke going around that Starbucks has so saturated the coffee market that it is now opening new Starbucks stores inside its old stores.

Well, not quite -- not yet -- but the corporate coffee colossus is presently trying to expand through an equally bizarre marketing strategy: By disowning its globally ubiquitous brand name.

With Starbucks' sales declining as more and more caffeine consumers reject the cookie-cutter corporate climate that the chain epitomizes, it is launching a new line of stores that disappears its name. There's no corporate signage on the new buildings, no logo stamped on every product inside and none of the generically bland ambience that makes one Starbucks just like the other 16,000 in the chain.

Instead, the new shops strive to be the anti-Starbucks, dressing up as funky neighborhood coffeehouses with a cool, local vibe. A sort of rustic, thrift-shop decor screens the corporate presence, and such additions as live music and poetry readings are meant to lend an aura of down-home authenticity.

The first of these faux local outlets opened last month in Seattle under the nom de commerce of "15th Avenue Coffee and Tea," taken from the name of its neighborhood. Future stores are also expected to appropriate the names of their neighborhoods all across the country in a corporate effort to convey a sense of belonging. The idea, as explained by the chain's senior vice president of global design, is to give each of the coffeehouses "a community personality."

What we have here, of course, is a willful attempt to commit consumer fraud. But it's such a goofy fraud that it's doomed to be an embarrassing failure.

Start with the fact that genuine neighborhood coffee shops genuinely have a "community personality." It's not something that can be faked or "given," much less replicated into a chain of 16,000 outlets. Indeed, one of the things you'll notice about a real community place is that its organizational chart rarely includes a "senior vice president of global design."

Corporate chains can't do "community," can't do "funky," can't do "cool," can't do "independent" -- because they're not. They're not any of those things.

In fact, Starbucks revealed just how inherently un-cool it is when it first began developing this absurdist chain of manufactured "authenticity." Since its entire corporate culture is rooted in the numbing homogeneity that one writer has dubbed "Generica," the company had no experience or expertise in authenticity. So, top executives surreptitiously deployed a gaggle of market researchers to snoop around a couple of popular local coffee houses in Seattle. Their mission: to find out what constitutes "community personality" -- and steal one.

Starbucks' snoops were not exactly subtle. Rather than entering the small shops inconspicuously, they would arrive as a group, crowding out real customers as they poked around and jotted notes in folders labeled, "Observation." Having gotten what they wanted, the whole gaggle would then depart, without even having had the courtesy of buying a single cup of coffee!

Starbucks is what it is. It can hide its name from us (at least for a while), but it can't hide its essence. The corporate nature will always out.

Instead of masquerading as a loveable independent, a more productive (and more honest) marketing strategy for Starbucks might have revealed itself at one of its branches near my home in Austin, Texas. This store sets side-by-side with that of another national chain, and the signs on the adjacent buildings make the two corporations appear to be functioning in symbiotic partnership: "Starbucks Coffee-Jiffy Lube."

I think there's a certain poetic integrity somewhere in that juxtaposition. Maybe the message is that either place will do a job on you.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: starbucks, jim hightower, coffee shops, authenticity, corporate coverup

Jim Hightower is a national radio commentator, writer, public speaker, and author of the new book, "Swim Against the Current: Even a Dead Fish Can Go With the Flow." (Wiley, March 2008) He publishes the monthly "Hightower Lowdown," co-edited by Phillip Frazer.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
LOL ! ... Tempest in a Teapot
Posted by: mmckinl on Aug 13, 2009 12:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yep ... Starbucks is trying to buck its corporate image ... but they are a much, much better corporation than thousands of corporations Hightower could have taken on ...

C'mon Jim you can do better than this ... Exxon is right in your neck of the woods.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Starbucks
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Aug 13, 2009 1:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That article was funny.

All that's left is to build a bunch of "Working Joe" droids to stand in front of each location every morning, sip coffee, BS about sports, and bitch about liberals and taxes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "Working Joe" (TM) Posted by: FbO Vorcha
» LOL Posted by: LMNOP
...
Posted by: ericthefool on Aug 13, 2009 1:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's a brilliant idea and many will love the change. I simply do not drink Starbucks because it is a corporation. A name change will not change my mind about visiting Starbucks. A corporation is a corporation, no matter how you dress it.

I support local shops, local owners, and local businesses. Now that's COMMUNITY!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ... Posted by: Spellsinger
» RE: ... Posted by: laoma
» RE: ... Posted by: bonzi
» RE: ... Posted by: Dak
Why are local stores authentic?
Posted by: lkonstan on Aug 13, 2009 1:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Complaining about Starbucks's attempt to mimic "local" coffee stores is a complete waste of time for progressive activists.

What, the "local" coffee store, privately owned and managed, plugged into the global supply chain, is so much better than Starbucks? We love "local" capitalists! We boo and hiss at multinational capitalists. Why exactly?

Starbucks can do "quirky" or "funky" or "authentic" or whatever because these are merely stylistic markers of distinction, ways people make themselves feel cool, and have absolutely zero political relevance.

I have great respect for people who don't care where they get their coffee, but are working their asses off trying to stop specific destructive corporate practices, trying to set up anticapitalist alternative institutions in the present, even trying to reform existing systems within narrowly mainstream constraints.

I have no respect for hipsters who think that by getting their coffee from "local" coffee shops -- and by spending their time worrying about whether their "local" shop is a clandestine Starbucks -- they're doing anything remotely political or relevant.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why are local stores authentic? Posted by: jewels@cr8.com
genuine neighborhood coffee shops
Posted by: sthomper on Aug 13, 2009 2:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i dont know if the story is true or not.

but just who makes the long lines at starbucks in morning? foreigners? anti-community types?

the local coffee shops i have been to often get a small sliver of the community. and the coffee cost about the same which i assume was the fairtrading beans.

i just look for cheaper coffee altogether with free internet. starbucks can call itself what they want. they have been dishonest with me about serving decaf. i have started avoiding them altogether - not because they are a corporation though.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Starschmucks
Posted by: Tom Degan on Aug 13, 2009 2:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What is it about Starbucks that some people find so appealing? The coffee is overpriced and it's lousy. They tend to play nice music - I even purchased a very nice John Lennon compilation of remixed tracks. But other than that the joint is overrated.

The GOP's Little Image Problem

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Starschmucks Posted by: Rungle
» Make it at home!! Posted by: Prairie Waif
» iced coffee tip.. Posted by: Drclaw
Starfuckt
Posted by: victoriahokulani on Aug 13, 2009 3:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Starbux business model has been fuct since last spring when gas hit $4/gallon. McDonald wasted no time vulturing in with its McCafe sludges. Those $5 grande latte-halfcaf-skim-nofoams are about as relevant as a pair of $400 jeans to the average flat-assbroke, pinkslipped, in-foreclosure Uh-merican.
Chapter 11 by 1Q 2010.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Silly But
Posted by: johnwinthrop on Aug 13, 2009 3:09 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hightower is right in that the fraud will be uncovered quickly and the sales will be no higher nor lower than otherwise. But why the outrage about the labelling? It's just a cup of coffee. I'm much more concerned about mislabeling and deceit in the White House-e.g., "Barack Obama, friend of Labor".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Silly But Posted by: AngryWhiteFemale
» RE: Silly But Posted by: cdmagda
Jim, Your outrage is weak...
Posted by: Celtic Tiger on Aug 13, 2009 3:20 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Or maybe it's just supposed to be a joke.
Either way, you can do better. Take on some other "corporation".
Starbuck's will or will not fail. Corporations are not all evil, and just because a business is small or "local", doesn't make it "authentic"...whatever that might be...or less exploitive of workers, better quality, etc.
Just check out your local insurance agent, broker or "financial advisor".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Jim, Your outrage is weak... Posted by: Celtic Tiger
Fraud?
Posted by: marxalot on Aug 13, 2009 3:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's fine to call Starbucks out on this, but I would stop short of calling it consumer fraud. Marketing is all about deception. It's ALL consumer fraud. It's our way of life!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Fraud? Posted by: cdmagda
Starbucks is a symptom of two things
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Aug 13, 2009 4:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. Unfettered capitalism. In a regulated capitalism, Starbucks would get into a lot of trouble for turning out to be a ruthless predator ala Walmart. Starbucks would be better off renaming itself to Walmart Coffee.

2. Society's addiction to fast food and its conditioned behavior of giving up taking even a few minutes to whip one's own healthy breakfast every morning. While I don't buy into the Republican version of "personal responsibility", society will have to put its foot down and ask themselves what the hell they're gaining by wasting more petro dollars traveling to a lousy coffee store to buy chemical laden trash in a cup for $5 plus health dollars.

I wouldn't mind having a coffee with someone on a special occasion such as a business meeting or even going out on a date but when I see almost everyone holding an expensive cup of coffee on their way to work, and yes some of them have their stomachs bulging, I have to shake my head in shame feeling sorry that we're not only the victims of unfettered disaster capitalism but also society's conditioned habits of grabbing those silly dilly quickies. No thanks for coffee or fast food. I'll get through another long day just fine without it. :)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That is very funny
Posted by: GPFrank on Aug 13, 2009 4:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They are like the 19th century missionaries who
changed the words of folks songs a little so they could sing them in church.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Over roasted and Overpriced
Posted by: thornwolf on Aug 13, 2009 4:46 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ridiculously overpriced, terribly burnt-tasting coffee, produced and sold by a company more into image than coffee.

Starbucks is all about Starbucks and not at all about coffee. The question is, do you want a Starbucks experience or a good cup of coffee?

Now Starbucks wants to pose as a coffee shop and not a Starbucks! This self-contradictory campaign will kill off the brand. R.I.P.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nobody Here But Us Just Plain Folks
Posted by: Lilly on Aug 13, 2009 6:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wait a minute. Do I discern a pattern? For two hours I have been reading political articles about Corporate America trying to make its Smash-the-Health-Care initiative look grassrootsy. Then, for a bit of recreation, I came to this Starbucks article and, there we go, Corporate Starbucks is doing the Same Thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Terrytom: Pissing in the soup
Posted by: Terrytom on Aug 13, 2009 6:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Way back a book that gave me good insight for business practice was “Up the Organization” written by Peter Townsend. He was the man that made Avis Rent a Car number two at the time.
He said it was a good idea to have a person on staff whose sole job was to criticize ideas. Townsend said that the only way that person could be fired was for being too polite.
At the time there were cut-rate rent a car companies cutting into their business. So Townsend proposed that they Avis start a cut-rate company to compete with those companies and actually against their own premium line. He said the man shot down the idea at once saying, “I don’t know what you call it but we Polacks call that pissing in the soup.”
Somebody should send a copy of the book to Starbucks CEO.

Terrytom

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

They ran out of money, genius.
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Aug 13, 2009 6:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Coffee at $2.00 a cup equals $14/week, equals $56 a month, equals $672 per year.

Poor Starbucks, I hardly knew ye*.

That's more than most folks in the world live on...even in the countries that have lent us money to support Bush(billions to defense contractors) and Obama (TRILLIONS to his crony bankers) largesses.

*never saw the point in waiting on expensive coffee

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Starbucks--an idiotic way to get coffee
Posted by: zooeyhall on Aug 13, 2009 6:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am not a coffee drinker, but I have never understood why people flock to these chintzy little places to order a cup of coffee that costs 10 times more then if you would make it yourself, and buy it from a clerk that is being paid starvation wages.

Maybe it's because I am 55 and turning into an old fuddy-duddy, but being a farmer and used to economizing, I just can't understand this Starbucks thing. My parents always taught me to be careful with how I spent my money, and they would have been apalled at buying something like the "gourmet" coffee of Starbucks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» CLARIFIED APOLOGY Posted by: americansheep
» Why we go there Posted by: Karen Vaughan
Starbucks' health insurance
Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey on Aug 13, 2009 7:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've almost never been to Starbucks, mostly because of price, also because their menu is just too confusing for me! I can easily make coffee at home, thanks.

But Starbucks has a good reputation for treating staff well. I've never had a job there - yet! - but many of us hourly wage slaves hear things like this and take notice. Famously, Starbucks has (or had?) a good health insurance plan that even part-timers can sign up for at low cost. Is this incorrect? Has it changed? How come it's never mentioned in articles like these? Seems pertinent, especially considering current events?

Although I rarely go there, and agree this "local" camouflage campaign sounds silly, I never quite understand all the mysterious animosity toward Starbucks. Didn't AlterNet have an article about this just a week or so ago? Why pick on Starbucks, what exactly is soooo bad about them as opposed to other chains? I don't get it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Starbucks' health insurance Posted by: gimmie shelter
» RE: Starbucks' health insurance Posted by: Gabba_Gabba_Hey
Who'da thunk it? They saturated a drug market called caffeine!
Posted by: kettleblack on Aug 13, 2009 8:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They have Americans hooked on yet another drug, coffee, but the market has topped off. It's being siphoned off by all those energy drinks like Red Bull & Rock Star.
Not to mention fewer people going to work (unemployment) means fewer coffee-sipping commuters.
Starbucks has to play Stealth Monopoly in order to kill any local competition. If this strategy works, look for Walmart to follow suit.
The Great American Copy Cat Game.
Who's Next?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Healthcare delivery system by any other name
Posted by: Natural Grocers on Aug 13, 2009 8:15 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not a very helpful analysis. Say what you want about Generica -- Starbucks operates in a time and within a system that 1) demands quarterly growth and 2) encourages bland familiarity. So, yes, they find ways to grow and provide a familiar, reliable product across the globe. However, taking pot shots at this new tactic is pretty lazy - just looks like you have a chip on your shoulder. I don't go to Starbucks of McDonalds unless I have to, but in a pinch I am glad they are there. Yet if I had to compare their corporate cultures and choose one to invest in or work for, clearly Starbucks gets my vote. For one thing, it has been described as a "healthcare delivery system" because it is willing to provide medical insurance to even its part-time employees, at a very high expense, which every one who buys expensive coffee there subsidizes.
Ah, wouldn't that have been a more worthwhile subject for your condiserable mental energies right now, rather than Starbucks acknowledging the limits of their comfortable homogeneity....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ba
Posted by: mnstra on Aug 13, 2009 9:49 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I LIKE THE STARBUCKS BRAND MOM AND POP COFFEES ARE CRAP.
I HOPE THEY KEEP THE BRAND ALIVE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ba Posted by: cdmagda
DICK CHENEY AND STARBUCKS: The Connection
Posted by: americansheep on Aug 13, 2009 10:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most mornings, Dick Cheney is reported to ride in his black SUV gas guzzler to his local corporate funky faux Starbucks for decaf to go. A nice round trip outing, he gets his exercise while purchasing decaf for his heart and doing what he can to add to air pollution. What a guy, huh, just like us commoners, full of contradictions. I wonder if he will be giving any poetry readings? His overly pretentious yet unintended voluntary endorsement of Starbucks means something evil lurks in that aroma. With a mascot like him it will be interesting to see how that shop can "go local, funky and real"...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dunkies vs Starbucks
Posted by: mtc on Aug 13, 2009 10:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As far as I can tell, Starbucks is not losing out to small coffee shops. In Massachusetts, at least, they're losing out to Dunkin Donuts. In my extended family there's a class divide over coffee. Starbucks is for snobs. Dunkies is for working people. So, the whole discussion of coffee in communities is complicated: which community?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Starbucks is OK (maybe)
Posted by: willymack on Aug 13, 2009 10:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just LOVE to sit back with a book I just bought at Barnes and Noble while sipping on a dark chocolate Mocha Frapuccino.
I also love the fresh-ground coffee I make at home.
Starbucks is a handy place when I'm away from the house and want some coffee. So is Mc Donald's or a gas station with a food store.
If Strabucks gets too big, it'll collapse under its own weight. That's one of the few true things about market forces.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Starbucks is OK (maybe) Posted by: cdmagda
Nexus
Posted by: Nexus on Aug 13, 2009 11:49 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are lucky in Australia - Starbucks have closed up shop and the tyranny of a homogenised chain has been broken. They were up against diverse small local chains and individual coffee shops that make nice coffee. There is no comparison with the local stuff and the 'coffee' that Starbucks offered.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just Sayin'
Posted by: QQOblivion on Aug 13, 2009 1:39 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I won't be fooled.

If the coffee sucks...

It's Starbucks!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is no such thing as local coffee
Posted by: Beck on Aug 13, 2009 2:24 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And some of you must have different Starbucks than the ones we visit on trips a few times a year. The coffee is great and about the same price as anywhere. I don't know if you get anything other than coffee or espresso. I've never gotten a really good "ahhhh" cup of coffee at a small, local place. Anyway, all coffee is imported. The shop might be local but the coffee isn't. I've also never had rude service at a Starbucks. Definitely had it at smaller places. Some small coffee shops seem almost xenophobic about customers they don't recognize.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yeah, yeah, yeah...I've heard it before
Posted by: shaman0979 on Aug 13, 2009 3:36 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Geez, what an easy target. C'mon, you wuss. How about spending some time exposing companies that perpetrate real fraud - like phony, bullsh*t wars and foreign occupations. Starbucks products are overpriced, sure. What's the news about that, genius. They also employ a lot of entry level people, spend more on employee health care (even for part-timers) than they do on coffee, and have generous benefits. Most stores and districts are also socially active at a local level. You'd be the first to endorse patronizing businesses that give a damn about their local economies, even if they do have a healthy markup.

Tip: Nobody is stared for your particular business. Go buy a bag of Folgers and brew it at home.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MIKE THE TRUTH SAYER
Posted by: Michael_S_Smith on Aug 13, 2009 5:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Starbucks may be a "corporation" and it may not be perfect in the mind of many progressives but at least it tries to do the right thing. As for its coffee well I am not a real coffee drinker I only drink flavored coffee, Mocha and that in the fall and winter and in the summer when it is hot I am into the FRAPACHIONOS. Yes Starbucks coffee is a bit pricey compared to McDonalds and even Dunkin Donunts but they are that far off with thier pirces for just plain coffee it is when you get the fancie coffee that is expensive

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: MIKE THE TRUTH SAYER Posted by: cdmagda
from an anonymous big city
Posted by: tokerdesigner on Aug 13, 2009 6:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I haven't spent a single precious dime in 30 years on coffee, corporate or otherwise. I drink a finger here and there-- out of a cup from some waste concentration can(p) at a street corner.

The difference from all you suckers is I haven't been buying the Fear of Germs trip which was foisted on the world by the ultimate corporation, the Propa & Ganda Co. (founded 1847, 50 years before famous and beloved Dr. Goebbels was born in the beauty of the lilies across the sea). I don't care if there's saliva fresh from a Pakistani just off the plane. It is a matter of immune factors (fresh air and exercise). Besides, if you just drink a finger now and then, you won't overdose on the tasty creamers, sugar etc.

Bonus news: if you find more french fries than is healthy to eat, sit in the park and train pigeons to peck them right from the hand. The key is: hold two french fries at a time, gripping each very tightly so the bird can get only a tiny amount with each peck. That way you can SPY ON THE BIRDS and watch a lot of peckage without harming the health of any one pigeon excessively. And take a sip of free $2 coffee every minute or two.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Do not do
Posted by: osd on Aug 13, 2009 7:06 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Starbucks, Walmart, Exxon and alot of other scum sucking corporations. It's just not where I wish to spend my money, so I don't. I do not need United Way to make my charity contributions either.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Huge Multinational Corporation is a Huge Multinational Corporation is a Huge Multinational Corpo…
Posted by: Ted Voth Jr on Aug 13, 2009 10:44 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A huge multinational corporation is a huge multinational corporation is a huge multinational corporation…

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Let's be realistic.
Posted by: regimeoftruth on Aug 15, 2009 8:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Starbucks probably gives much more control over the decor and day to day running of these coffee shops to the local management, which is a good thing. Furthermore, it would be difficult to host a "fake" band, or a "fake" poetry reading. The fact of the matter is that if it is good business for Starbucks to give their local employees control over their own shop, then they will. I don't see how this can be a bad thing. Most people in the US work for corporations, and this is only a bad thing because corporations are exploitative and create sterile, depressing, homogenous work environments. Starbucks is trying NOT to be that kind of company. Starbucks does a lot of feel-good, liberal kind of stuff (recycling, fair trade, decent wages and health plan from what I've heard) because feel-good liberal types of people drink a lot of coffee. Who cares if that's the reason, as long as they do it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Let's be realistic. Posted by: cdmagda
I love coffee!
Posted by: Hankbrilliant on Aug 15, 2009 11:39 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But I hate Starbucks. I live near El Cerrito Plaza in El Cerrito, CA. There is a Starbucks store there. They charge a $1.79 for a small cup of coffee in a paper cup! On top of that, they use French words to describe their various sizes. What the hell is a "vente'?" Gimme a break!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

They're right and it's going to work
Posted by: Zeugitai on Aug 16, 2009 8:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They know who they're dealing with and they have got this right. It is going to work.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

iPod Touch Video Converter
Posted by: boay on Aug 18, 2009 6:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
iPod Touch Video Converteris remarkable for iPod Touch's powerful multimedia functions. Wonderful sound and image quality definitely bring much ease and fun to your tiring work-day. However, it is also tiresome to update your iPod Music. So this iPod Touch Video Converter is emerging because of this. Using this software, you can convert various video and audio formats to iPod touch, such as avi, flv, mpeg, wmv, mpeg, divx, mp3, etc. Wonderful output quality and stable converting speed will definitely satisfy your demands.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Brian
Posted by: Brianwrit on Aug 26, 2009 11:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was looking for the end of the article -- and it never came!

Hightower's piece is the first part of a more complete observation of how message control is changing perceived reality... a practice that is now as widespread as from embedding troops to manufacturing protests to greening car companies.

Now I'm waiting fro Hightower to write part two!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement