Should Starbucks be taking a stance on the conflict between Israel and Palestine?

  • Why not? I'm seeing some disparities here

    Because you own a business does not some how relegate you to some sort of limited expression of thought, preaching is different than acting, so I don't see why they shouldn't if they decide to so, the consequences are theirs. Also considering that politicians interfere with businesses (control or resources), this means business has a right to express themselves politically as well on this basis alone.

    Another thing that I find interesting is that teachers / Unions / government employees are somehow not held to these standards (for those bringing up morality and status in the No's), and in fact targeting a much more susceptible and captive audience.

    Also I have a feeling that the issue lies with Starbucks picking the "wrong" side which upset the naysayers more than anything else. Because many other business have made statements in the past but they don't become controversial unless they pick the "wrong and less progressive" side.

  • No they shouldn't

    Starbucks is a company. Starbucks is not a country. They should continue serving their coffee and not meddle in diplomatic affairs. Also, because Starbucks is a huge company, they have influence over certain people. Nobody's opinion on diplomacy should be swayed due to what their favorite coffee shop believes in.

  • No, Starbucks should not be taking a stance on the conflict between Israel and Palestine

    No, Starbucks should not be taking a stance on the current conflict between Israel and Palestine because businesses do not belong in the world of politics. Businesses like Starbucks exist to serve their customer bases. Starbucks customers are located all over the world and thus might take a offense whatever stance they were to take. Thus it is better for companies like Starbucks to be neutral to retain their business popularity in the countries in which it operates.

  • Preaching a social agenda is bad for business.

    There are two sides to every argument. If you take a side, you take the risk of alienating some of your customers. There is almost no gain for doing so, as you would not get more customers by speaking out. Starbucks should just stick to selling coffee and expanding their stores.

  • No, they should not.

    I'm not sure where this starbucks rumor started and I don't think they should be taking a political stance at all and I don't see why they would or how it would benefit them. I think we will see that this rumor is false but at any rate politics and corporations do not mix.

  • No, Starbucks should not be taking a stance

    No, I don't believe that Starbucks should be taking a stance on the conflict between Israel and Palestine. Starbucks is a coffee shop and should not get involved in world politics. Choosing one side over the other could alienate customers and I don't think it is the place of the company to have political leanings one way or the other. Starbucks does not originate from either of these places so they should not become involved.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.