Starbucks is Closing: Boo Mother Freaking Hoo

Am I out of touch with American society or is the media going just a bit overboard with coverage of Starbucks downsizing its number of locations? I was a bit surprised, though not shocked when the Chicago Tribune carried two front page above the fold stories on Starbucks in the business section yesterday (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-fri-space-starbucks-health-cjul18,0,2229765.column) and (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-fri-starbucks-closejul18,0,876488.story). Then this morning, yet another Starbucks story was on the front page of the Trib (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-sat-starbucksjul19,0,7595492.story). I checked the Trib website, and noticed several other stories I hadn't noticed about the Starbucks closures.

The Trib is no doubt playing into the overall trend of the American media to dumb down its "news" to deliver more human interest fluff and less real news. One only need to tune into CNN or FOX any given morning and witness the endless parade of stories about celebrities, miracle diets, tips on raising children, and endless ad-nauseum coverage of whatever the latest: (pick one) weather disaster, cute missing white girl, or celebrity trial happens to be at that time. Local media is even worse. Can anyone in Chicago forget the amount of coverage surrouding the appearance of a cougar in Roscoe Village garnered? Honestly, people who couldn't tell you who the current president of the United States is can definitely tell you all about that cougar that was on the loose in Roscoe Village.

The fact that Starbucks is closing 600 locations is news- after all people will lose their jobs- but can anyone actually be surprised that Starbucks is closing locations? Anyone with half a brain could see what their strategy was- saturate the market with locations everwhere, then contract once people were addicted. The Trib has devoted more coverage to Starbucks this week than they did to the terrorist attack on the American consulate in Istanbul a couple weeks ago that killed three security guards, and far more coverage than what was given when 9 American soldiers were killed in Afghanistan last week. One can also compare the Starbucks coverage to a tiny little article on page 12 of today's paper which briefly mentions that 3 Afghan's were killed in in explosions and 2 humanitarian aid workers were kiddnapped.

But its not just the volume of Starbucks stories (which will no doubt drive sales at Starbucks locations) but the absurdity of the coverage itself that is most gauling. Two of the three stories mentioned in paragraph one imply that Starbucks is unfairly targeting minority areas with store closures, as though the chain had been taken over by some klansman who just choose stores in black areas to close because he hated the idea of African Americans drinking their beverages, rather than the fact that these are the least profitable stores. In the Barbara Rose/Wailin Wong story, the Trib quotes Phil Jackson associate pastor at Lawndale Community Church, "For Starbucks to look at all the communities that are suffering, and then to close the stores htat they are closing is really kind of hypocritical. They started the store knowing what the community was all about. You come here so you can uplift the community."

Isn't it the job of churches like Mr. Jacksons', rather than Starbucks- a purveyor of mocha latte's- to "uplift" impoverished communities? The truth is that the people hurt the most by the Starbucks closures (other than the employees themselves) are the real estate agents who try to peddle new condo developments in some of the very tough neighborhoods where Starbucks will be closing locations. Real estate agents trying to bring white folks into minority neighborhoods to buy condos try to point to Starbucks locations as a sign of gentrification, and then shuttle the person into the safety of the condo to sell them on the stainless steel appliances, vaulted ceilings, and all the other cookie cutter crap that is put in condos these days. Everbody else that actually needs a Starbucks fix ought to be just fine- after all there are still going to be around 18,000 locations in Chicago that won't close.