Politics and retail: That’s a no-win mix

March 15, 2010 at 12:00a.m.

Associated Press

NEW YORK

Guns. Religion. Abortion. These are the no-win arguments that spoil family gatherings — and the stuff of retailers’ nightmares.

Starbucks has found itself in the middle of just such an argument as its stores became forums for demonstrations by both pro-gun and gun-control advocates. All for a firearm policy that hasn’t changed and is the same as most retailers’: Follow the local law. If it’s legal to carry a firearm in town, it’s allowed in the stores.

In recent months, the “open-carry” arm of the gun-rights movement, which advocates that gun owners carry visible weapons as they go about their daily business, have been exercising their rights. They’ve been proudly displaying their sidearms in public places, sometimes meeting up in groups.

Starbucks’ association with a politically liberal, “latte sipper” ethos, made it a tempting target for gun-control advocates. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence attracted more than 26,000 signatures demanding that Starbucks “offer espresso shots, not gunshots.”

Starbucks’ response? It reiterated its policy of following state and local laws and politely asked everyone to leave it out of the debate.

It’s frightful territory for a business, which risks alienating customers and losing sales by taking sides on such emotional debates.

“They want you to like them. They don’t want to be red brands or blue brands,” said Allen Adamson, managing director of branding firm Landor Associates in New York.

Starbucks’ situation is unusual in that it became a symbol of a debate not of its own making. But other companies have dealt with politically fraught situations where they risk alienating customers no matter what they do.

This holiday season, the Christian group American Family Association urged a boycott of retailers, including The Gap and Old Navy, for not using the word “Christmas” in their holiday advertising. But other customers resent focusing on the Christian holiday.

Marketing experts say standing firm was probably the best option Starbucks had.

Charles R. Taylor, professor of marketing at Villanova School of Business, said changing its position would diminish the company’s reputation and alienate people on the opposite side of the debate.

Some businesses are taking a stand, even if it costs them customers. California Pizza Kitchen and Peet’s Coffee & Tea banned customers with guns after open-carry advocates started showing up earlier this year. So has Great American Restaurants, a chain of 10 restaurants and a bakery in northern Virginia.

The company’s CEO, Randy Norton, said he decided to ban gun owners from carrying weapons when they planned large gatherings at his chain.

“It’s too early to see the real impact right now, but this will have an effect,” said Fred Taub, an Ohio consumer advocate who is a consultant to companies on boycotts.

Starbucks is hardly unique in following state and local laws that allow weapons to be carried openly, which is legal in 43 states. Most large retailers, among them Target Corp., Home Depot Inc. and Best Buy Inc., say they follow state and local laws. The world’s largest retailer, Wal-Mart Stores Inc., didn’t respond to queries, but open-carry advocates also count it among those that don’t restrict patrons from openly carrying weapons.