December 2, 2004
SELF-TARGETED:
Target in tough spot after banning Salvation Army bell-ringers (Associated Press, 12/02/04)
A backlash could be brewing against Target Corp. after it decided to ban Salvation Army bell-ringers and their red kettles from its store entrances this holiday season.The company announced the decision months ago, but the criticism didn't start to mount until Salvation Army officials recently noted the problems it could cause to their fund raising plans, and shoppers noticed the bell ringers' absence.
The latest reaction has come from several national Christian groups, who are denouncing Target's decision.
"For Target to say that the Salvation Army is no longer welcome at the inn should send a message to Christians that perhaps they'd like to do their shopping elsewhere," said Robert Knight, a spokesman for Concerned Women of America, a Christian activist group that claims more than 500,000 members.
Do they not have any marketing department to tell them this is idiotic? Have none of their executives seen Miracle on 34th Street? Posted by Orrin Judd at December 2, 2004 3:05 PM
The story I'm reading is that they are scared to death of some lower court ruling against Wal-Mart that says if they allow any solicitation on their property they have to allow all solicitations including those from union organizers.
If that is true they will take the publicity hit for obvious reasons. I've noticed that the Salvation Army is outside all the unionized grocery stores but not outside any of the non-union retailers.
Posted by: Jeff at December 2, 2004 3:16 PMSlightly off target (npi), but why does the Salvation Army get a pass for being a cult?
Posted by: David Cohen at December 2, 2004 3:36 PMMy mother's whole family was in the Salvation Army (Grandpa was a preacher in their outfit). She tells great stories of standing out in the middle of an Iowa winter riging that bell. And of course Dad makes jokes about how Salvation Army girls only dance when lying down. She's not in it anymore because they treated my grandparents kind of shabby towards the end. As to why they aren't treated as a cult, I think it's because they've been around for a long time so they got grandfathered in. Just like those damned Zoroastrians. But still, snazzy uniforms.
Posted by: Governor Breck at December 2, 2004 3:49 PMDavid,
I read somewhere that the largest donations to the Salvation Army come from Jews.
Target is part of a European multinational, so it should not surprise that they are clueless about a public display of American religiousness and charity which has been an integral part of the season since forever.
Posted by: Bart at December 2, 2004 4:04 PMThe Salvation Army always earns high marks in ratings of charitable organizations.
Posted by: jim hamlen at December 2, 2004 4:07 PMMost people don't know the Salvation Army is a church. They think it's just a charitable organization.
Posted by: Chris Durnell at December 2, 2004 4:20 PMTrue, the Salvation Army is a church, but it is also by far the most effective charity in dealing with addiction, homelessness, abuse of women, etc. I am urging my friends and acquaintances to boycott Target and instead shop at Wal-Mart, online, etc.
Posted by: John Cunningham at December 2, 2004 4:24 PMGood thing this came up during my company's charitable gift drive. I gave them a good donation (way more than I ever managed to throw in the kettles) ... and company match to boot. Heh...
P.S. - Somewhere, a company HR flunky is cringing. That's good too...
Posted by: TimF at December 2, 2004 4:31 PM"Target is part of a European multinational"
??? Say what??? Target is an American company based in Minneapolis.
Posted by: Robert Duquette at December 2, 2004 4:46 PMI thought the Daytons sold out to Carrefour or some other such company.
Posted by: Bart at December 2, 2004 4:50 PMThe kettle thing started as a crab pot on the San Francisco docks in 1891, by the way.
Posted by: PapayaSF at December 2, 2004 4:53 PMThe Salvation Army is a cult?? I always thought their theology was orthodox evangelical Protestant. My next-door neighbor in high school was a Salvation Army officer; he was my weekly chess opponent. My grandmother always preferred to contribute to the Salvation Army rather than the Red Cross because, as she said from my grandfather's experiences in World War II, the Salvation Army provided services for free that the Red Cross made you pay for.
Posted by: Joe at December 2, 2004 5:44 PMTarget is owned by Dayton-Hudson Corp.
One of the main stockholders is Sen. Mark Dayton D-MN. He's the guy who fled DC just before the election.
Dayton-Hudson has strong ties to the Minnesota DFL party and the Mpls city council. Using their political connections they successfully chased Wal-Mart out of downtown Minneapolis.
Posted by: Gideon at December 2, 2004 6:02 PMTarget definitely not sold out to Carrefour.
The company is now called "Target." The old Dayton-Hudson had already changed the names of their eponymous stores to Marshall Field's when they sold the spartment store division this year.
Sen Dayton may still own a chunk of the company, but no member of the founding family has had a role with the company for many years. Gideon, you may be right that Target is quite connected with DFL, but in my discussions with Target people I am given to understand that the company had no intention of putting a store downtown (in their new headquarters building) until the city council practically begged them to do it, "practically" meaning "made it free." If you've ever seen the store, it is quite nonstandard and therefore more difficult to stock and manage. I would really be interested in any information you have to the contrary, however.
Posted by: Brian (MN) at December 2, 2004 7:40 PMNow Bart, be honest: was your thought about Carrefour inspired by the hip pronounciation of Target as (Tar-jay)?
Posted by: jim hamlen at December 2, 2004 7:48 PMJeff at the top is right on the money.
This very thing was high on the agenda when I got my dose of law for Squadron Commanders.
Posted by: Jeff Guinn at December 2, 2004 8:27 PMThe story I'm reading is that they are scared to death of some lower court ruling against Wal-Mart that says if they allow any solicitation on their property they have to allow all solicitations including those from union organizers.
Not sure if that's right. Here in Fargo, the bellringers are in front of Walmart. (In fact, I'll be out there for a couple of hours next week.)
Posted by: Roy Jacobsen at December 3, 2004 11:15 AMI've done a little research into the Salvation Army. It's not a cult, but they have several extra-biblical teachings. They are basically a holiness church movement. Read more about it here: http://kiihnworld.blogspot.com/2004/11/should-i-boycott-target-updated.html.
I choose not to give money to the Salvation Army because I don't agree with their doctrine. I'm not boycotting Target either. It employs many, many people here in Minnesota and it does donate lots of money to our local communities. No company is holier than any other one; you can easily find fault with most of them. True help for the poor comes from us giving our time and money in our own neighborhoods.
Just my thoughts...
Before you guys let your conspiracy theories carry you away, this is now standard policy in big retailing.
General Growth Properties, the largest owner/manager of shopping centers, does not allow anybody to solicit.
Their stated reason is that they cannot accommodate all and don't know how to select winners. So they have a cheesy Night of Giving in which local beggars can sell tickets to allow people to get dubious discounts for four hours.
I wrote about this in my paper back in March or April.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at December 4, 2004 12:06 AMTheir stated reason is that they cannot accommodate all and don't know how to select winners.OMG, and here I thought zero-tolerance was slowly on its way out. Instead it's spreading from schools to the general population? Ack! Help!!!
Tell you what, why don't these folks confess to the stockholders that they are incompetent to be managers, and resign in well-deserved disgrace? Because if you can't do the hard work to figure out how to make decisions, then just what-the-heck are you doing to earn your salary?
Posted by: Kirk Parker at December 4, 2004 3:49 AM"Cult", I suppose, was a little overblown as the SA has been around long enough not to be considered a cult. However, the quasi-military organization and the exploitation of members as workers are, hmmm, somewhat odd.
Posted by: David Cohen at December 4, 2004 11:12 PM