Citing MnIndy, MSNBC looks into Target’s MN Forward gift
Tuesday, August 03, 2010 at 12:37 pm
- 2 Comments
The Minnesota Independent got props in a Keith Olbermann segment that posed a good question: Will Target’s MN Forward donation scare other companies from donating to political campaigns? Olbermann interviewed TPM’s Christina Bellantoni, who says the furor over Target’s $150,000 donation to MN Forward, a GOP-friendly PAC that ran ads on behalf of gay marriage opponent Tom Emmer, could chill political giving in Minnesota. She says she talked with business owners here who are “spooked” that activists are using Target’s $150,000 donation as “an example of Citizens United gone wrong.”
“The Target line on this is that Target supports pro-business candidates,” she said. “…They say they’re getting dragged down into a social issue because the candidate they’re backing, with this very friendly ad that… doesn’t mention any social issues, is anti–gay marriage.”
Target, of course, is facing outrage and boycotts from LGBT and progressive groups, including the Human Rights Campaign, OutFront Minnesota and MoveOn.org.
MnIndy got a quick mention about GOP-endorsed candidate Emmer’s legislative record on LGBT issues. Not getting any love from Olbermann was the local video journalism outfit The UpTake. Jason Barnett, its executive director, tweeted that the network used its footage of Randi Reitan’s protest at an area Target store without permission. He tweeted: “So, NBC used our Target story video last night, but didn’t cite us, or license the video. Really not cool.”
Watch the segment:
2 Comments
Comment posted August 3, 2010 @ 9:38 pm
The enemy of my enemy may be my friend, but what about the friend of my enemy?
I am sure that Target is not supporting Emmer for his anti-gay ideology, but that is an inseparable part of the package. Target has to accept responsibility for all the consequences of their actions, intended or not. I do not think that many of their customers will trade their civil rights for a shopping experience.
To oversimplify it, Target and other companies may have to choose between tax policy and customer base.
In time, consumers may also have to choose between lesser evils. This could lead to a revival of local small businesses to compete with box stores, though the idea of devolving into political ideology as a market differentiator does not appeal to me.
Comment posted August 4, 2010 @ 9:43 am
It seems almost insane to allow powerful organizations to make such political contributions. Let’s be clear that this is not a one-man-one-vote type of situation. We are, in effect, giving the one or few decision makers of such organizations the ability to affect an election. That is not equality and it is not freedom. Money pretty much determines elections in the US. On what basis do we claim free choice of who is elected?
If only ZeraLee were correct and this could be fought out in the market place. But, large organizations that are subject to consumer reaction (retail is but not all are) will simply learn to hide their actions or pay to spread misinformation.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
