Commentary
At Target, 'we do not have a political or social agenda'
by Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel(Editor's note: We've invited commentaries from officials at Target and other businesses that made controversial donations in support of Tom Emmer, the endorsed GOP candidate for governor. The Target communications staff suggested instead that we publish CEO Gregg Steinhafel's July 27 memo to Target employees, and the subsequent short statement responding to a newspaper ad placed by the Human Rights Campaign, an organization that advocates for gay rights. We offer the memo and statement here.)
----
A Message to Target Team Members from Gregg Steinhafel, Target Chairman, President & CEO
Dear Target Team,
In the past week I've heard from some of you, including our GLBT team members, regarding your concerns with Target's recent contributions to MN Forward, an independent expenditure committee that is supported by a broad coalition of large and small businesses throughout the state, including the Minnesota Business Partnership and the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce.
As you know, Target has a history of supporting organizations and candidates, on both sides of the aisle, who seek to advance policies aligned with our business objectives, such as job creation and economic growth. MN Forward is focused specifically on those issues and is committed to supporting candidates from any party who will work to improve the state's job climate. However, it is also important to note that we rarely endorse all advocated positions of the organizations or candidates we support, and we do not have a political or social agenda.
In the context of this contribution, some of you have raised questions regarding our commitment to diversity, and more specifically, the GLBT community. Let me be very clear: Target's support of the GLBT community is unwavering, and inclusiveness remains a core value of our company. Some current examples of that support include:
Domestic partner benefits.
Sponsorship of Twin Cities Pride.
Sponsorship of Out & Equal Workplace Summit.
In addition, Target's rating of 100 percent on the 2009 and 2010 Human Rights Campaign Corporate Equality Index further demonstrates the reputation our company has earned.
As CEO, I consider it my responsibility to create conditions in which Target can thrive, and I promise to do so with the best interests of our guests, team, shareholders and communities in mind. I appreciate your input and understanding.
Gregg Steinhafel, Chairman, President and CEO, Target
----
July 30 response to the Human Rights Campaign ad:
Target understands the concerns of the HRC. We have had multiple conversations with the HRC during the past few weeks and will continue our constructive dialogue. Target respects the work of the HRC and appreciates our partnership with them over the years. We hope to continue to work with the HRC in a spirit of mutual cooperation.
At Target, we listen to our guests, our team members and our communities -- and we have heard them on this issue. We are committed to doing better and regret that we have let down our team members and guests. We are evaluating ways to make sure they know the high value we place on our relationships with them.
Comments (13)
The point of the recent all-conservative-justices-voting-in-the-affirmative Supreme Court decision permitting corporations to donate directly to political campaigns and, like in this case, advocacy groups was to enable corporations to exercise their support for certain political positions. The group in question -- supported by Target and Best Buy -- clearly supports political candidates who take a view that is not simply lacking in support for the LGBT community but violently opposes and is complete hostile to that community. Imagine a major corporation in the early 1960s saying as Target has that it "valued" its African American employees and customers, but, for reasons of their business positions, was supporting candidates who oppose civil rights legislation calling for desegregation and equal opportunity. There is no moral distinction between that position and Target's. The Supreme Court tells us that Target and Best Buy are permitted to make those choices, and I and millions of other Americans who oppose bigots and bigotry are permitted to choose to never patronize Target again. That is the choice that I have made.
I appreciate the apology made to the LGBT community. Certainly this group was an unintended victim of the contribution made by Target to Mr. Emmer. I do believe Target is committed to LGBT equality.
That said, the uproar over this support goes far beyond LGBT equality. There are a number of positions taken by Mr. Emmer that Target's key consumer base, and I daresay many employees, in this state find extremely offensive. Target has spent years and huge sums of money cultivating a consumer base that shops at Target and refuses to shop at Walmart based on their corporate images. To publicly support this candidate, who has many positions which run counter their corporate image, seems to be a brain-dead move by executives who are out of touch with the consumers in their target market.
It is difficult for me to understand your explanation when you write that you both support "organizations and candidates, on both sides of the aisle, who seek to advance policies aligned with our business objectives" and that "we do not have a political or social agenda."
Supporting candidates' and organizations' policies is a political agenda.
Target provides a forum for political candidates on both sides of the issues to publish their views. What the politicians do with that opportunity may become the politician's undoing.
Target enabled Tom Emmer and opposing candidates to present their views and defend themselves against vicious personal attacks. In my opinion, they provided a public service by doing so.
It is illogical to assume that Target's motives to enable public speech infer their support of everything either candidate says while using that forum. Do we punish a microphone or electronics equipment manufacturer for what is said over their system? Of course not.
Hear, hear-I agree with both Sielginde and Craig-giving money is admitting a political and social agenda (sieglinde's comment) therefore, I am no longer giving my money to Target (Craig's comment) because I have a social and political agenda contrary to Target's support of Emmer
One doesn't have to be LGBT to object to Target's support of MN Forward, and by extension, Tom Emmer. It seems to me that the SMART business strategy would be to stay politically neutral. If anyone at Target is reading this, I do almost all of my family's shopping, and I have a 4-year-old who is already brand-loyal to Target. I'm not ready to boycott you YET, but I'm watching, and I can take my daughter with me.
Our founding fathers had a radical idea... all are created equal. Unlimited money in campaigns threatens democracy itself. Imagine companies being able to pour millions into a campaigns. What makes a strong economy? Equality. Education. President Bush's supply side economy with its tax cuts for the uber-rich created this economic mess. Emmer and Move Forward Minnesota are offering more of the same. Reduce my taxes, save the economy. False. We need to rebuild the local economy.
Target's management is talking out of both sides of their mouths. They claim to have contributed to MN Forward to "improve the state's job climate." However, the group supports Emmer, who proposes extreme cuts to state education funding. Maintaining Minnesota's well educated workforce is vital to keeping and creating jobs. Emmer's agenda would lower the quality of the state's workforce.
I believe this is less about a "business environment" for Target, and more about keeping income taxes low for multi-millionare executives.
I have a hard time believing Gregg Steinhafel's words in this statement. He says- "Target's support of the GLBT community is unwavering, and inclusiveness remains a core value of our company."
How can that be true if he gives $150,000 to a candidate who will do all he can to make certain the gay community never has equality? Is their "inclusiveness" just to attract the best and brightest workforce .... many coming from the gay community? Does Steinhafel really care what happens to each of his employees at the end of the work day and they walk out the door to a world Target is buying with this new Supreme Court ruling? The shareholders need to have a conversation with this CEO for the Target name has been damaged on many fronts.
Unions represent their members. It's logical that they would use member dues to support causes beneficial to them. It's illogical that a corporation would use the union precedent to defend their donations to candidates whose views are not only offensive to the employees but not in their best issues, especially those many employees at Target who support a liberal social issues agenda. Heck, not even shareholders were given a say in this one. Target top management is using company profits to further only one agenda--that of a handful of grossly overpaid execs who live off the creativity and energy of workers they don't give a rip about.
He`s pretty good at back peddling and spinning, but I`m not buying it, and hopefully neither will the majority of Americans. Until Target donates an equal amount of money to a gay rights organization that is fighting for equal rights and entitlements for gay couples, I will not shop at Target again. Prior to this, Target was my store of choice. Once they make reparations so to speak, they must stop donations to candidates with these religious based, anti human rights agendas. I personally think the "news" of Target`s donation was "leaked" by themselves, and this whole thing was a marketing ploy, knowing that gay people would boycott, the results being planned by Target to pull in a whole new shopping demographic of religious fanatics who would become up in arms against the "horrible" gay activists that in their minds are trying to diminish their own rights.
I moved to Minnesota in August of 2010 and haven't shopped at Target since. If Target really supports GLBT issues, why don't they donate $150,000 to a GLBT-supporting candidate or cause, not some measly 10,000 to Pride every year? Only then will they regain my business!
Post a comment
Please be civil, brief and relevant.
E-mail addresses are never displayed but they are required to confirm your comments. All comments are moderated. MPR reserves the right to edit any comments on this site and to read them on the air with attribution. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting.
You must be 13 or over to submit information to Minnesota Public Radio. The information entered into this form will not be used to send unsolicited e-mail and will not be sold to a third party. For more information see Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Latest News & Features
News Cut
with Bob CollinsIn The Spotlight
-
Sound Learning
Looking for ways to ensure your students are doing quality research from credible sources? Sound Learning is a launching point to Minnesota Public Radio's content on the Web. -
The Current Music Blog
Your daily note for good music, news and pop culture. With attempted jokes.
- Become a Member
- Member Connect Accounts
- Leadership Circle
- Sustaining Members
- Member Discounts
- Become a Sponsor
- Tax Information
- Planned Giving
- Vehicle Donation
- Donate Stock