Win but Fail: Target

I don't remember the last time I shopped at a Wal-Mart. This is completely intentional. For one, practically everyone I've ever known who has worked there can rattle off a series of war stories that reduce me to gaping disbelief. Harassment, bad management, discrimination, low wages, draconian practices, censorship, and deleterious effects on the local economy don't exactly inspire me to hand over my money.

In an ideal world, I'd be able to turn around and buy local without settling for less. Wal-Mart's evil empire is big, and it isn't going away any time soon, but I live in a big enough city that there are choices. Different supermarkets, clothing retailers, record shops, etc. have more or less replaced the void that Wal-Mart's sprawling Supercenters left behind. And, of course, we have a Target.

WIN

It's hard not to love Target. Their image is less "nuclear family" and more "diverse community". They've got a cute canine mascot and they're inclusive during the winter holidays (a welcome thing for those of us tired of being wished a Merry Christmas). While some of the designers they partner with aren't my cup of tea -- yes, I realize that not loving Martha Stewart is some kind of horrible personal failing -- their housewares are stylish. Plus, they sell clothes I'd be happy wearing to the beach, at the office, and on special occasions.

Target also doesn't hammer their customers with constant advertisements, promotions, or mood music. Presumably, Target Corporation trusts that I know where I am when I enter their stores, and is courteous enough not to shout at me about how awesome they are the whole time I'm there.

From a social responsibility angle, Target looks pretty good on the surface. Their website names diversity as a core value of the company. According to Wikipedia, Forbes recognized them in 2007, naming them #11 on a list of list of "Most Admired" companies, and Target Corporation gives 5% of its pre-tax operating profit to causes and the community. The company typically scores well on the Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Equality Index as well, scoring 100% in 2009 for its GLBTQ-friendly policies, benefits, and ad campaigns.

FAIL

Of course, that 2009 CEI score came out before Target Corporation donated $100,000 in funds and $50,000 in services to a Republican gubernatorial candidate named Tom Emmer. Emmer, a pro-business candidate, is a social conservative who states on his website that he supports "traditional marriage" and favors a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as being between one man and one woman. When LGBTQ groups, employees, customers pressed for the corporation to explain (and to withdraw support from Emmer), Target's line was that they support candidates "based strictly on issues that affect our retail and business objectives."

Other points of fail:

- Target has been cited multiple times for sourcing and contracting goods manufactured with sweatshop labor. (Source: Knowmore.org)

- Target scored low on the NAACP's Economic Reciprocity Initiative report, and has been accused of discriminating against African American applicants and employees. (Source: Knowmore.org and CorpWatch)

- Target may engage in anti-union practices, and most employees receive wages well below a living wage. (Source: CorpWatch)

- While the company's current stance is unclear, pharmacists who work for Target have in the past been allowed to sign a 'conscience clause' which allows them to refuse to dispense contraceptives. (Source: Planned Parenthood)

THE VERDICT

Large chain and big-box stores are big because they do a tremendous amount of business. So much business that minorities and their allies probably can't boycott effectively as a single strategy. Moreover - at least here in the Midwestern United States - it's effectively impossible to stock a household with necessities without doing business with a company that engages in shady or discriminatory business practices. At best, you can line the big retailers up in a spectrum of less bad, bad, worse, and worst.

I'm not thrilled with Target's bad practices. I'm definitely not thrilled to see them bankrolling someone who wants to deny their LGBTQ employees the right to marry.

I still intend to vote with my dollars and buy from more socially progressive vendors when I can, but when I can't find what I need (or afford it) elsewhere, I know I'm going to choose the lesser of two evils. I intend to be another voice calling for them to make different choices in the future, though according to CorpWatch, most of Target's political donations in 2004 were to Republican candidates.

As evil empires go, they do an awful lot of good as well. On the other hand, they're still less bad than Wal-Mart. That has to count for something.