Read the following article:
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/starbucks-ends-race-together-campaign-stores-effort-not-162634531--sector.html
Answer the following questions related to the article:
1. In the article, Howard Schultz gave a reason for Starbucks conducting their "Race Together" campaign. Explain his reasoning in your own words.
2. What did the full-page ads taken out by the company say? To what is this phrase alluding?
3. According to Schultz, the campaign isn't over, even if employees aren't writing "Race Together" on cups anymore. What are the company's future plans to continue the campaign?
4. Critics of the campaign say that Starbucks "was overstepping its boundaries with a campaign on sensitive cultural topics that had no place in the coffee shop's lines." Explain what this means. Do you agree? Why or why not?
5. Do a little research on how individuals or companies have tried to use race relations / the Civil Rights Movement as an advantage for themselves or their company. Explain how they did it and whether or not they were ethical in doing it.
Makenzie Taylor
ReplyDelete1) Howard Schultz said that he wanted get people to begin talking more about the subject of race, as it is a very important matter in today's society.
2) The ads said "Shall We Overcome?" ; the phrase is alluding to the people handling and overcoming the subject of race and dealing with it better in our society.
3) More "Race Together" activities, expand to urban neighborhoods, hire 10,000 "opportunity youth", and advertise the campaign with USA Today.
4) Critics think Starbucks was really exceeding their power in forcing conversation about race. I believe that Starbucks had a good idea in mind, and what they were going for is a pretty good thing to starts. However, forcing a conversation with a stranger on a topic that could quickly get heated was the bad part. Their ultimate goal is great, but how they executed it was pretty poor. But the encouraging slogans that were written on the cups were nice.
5) Lucky Charms faced much criticism for playing into Irish racist stereotypes. Just in the 1800's, Irish Americans faced much discrimination and were thought to be greedy, selfish, superstitious, and thieving. People didn't appreciate Lucky Charms reinforcing these outdated prejudices.
Emily Perry:
ReplyDelete1. Howard Schultz stared the "Race Together" campaign because he felt it was important to discuss racial issues.
2. The full-page ads taken out by the company said "Shall We Overcome." I believe this is alluding to the topic of racial equality and how we should overcome the racial tensions.
3. The company's future for continuing this campaign include hiring those in urban areas and hire atleast ten thousands new "opporotunity youth" within the next three years or so. He also plans on prodcing more advertisements on the subject.
4. This means that since this is a very sensitive topic as is, it would probably create some tension between the company and its customers and could make the baristas feel uncomfortable speaking about the topic with a complete stranger. I believe that it is okay to write "Race Together" phrase on the cup and maybe just add a link the customers could go to to get better insight of the campaign idea and discussions.
5. In 1971, Coca-Cola created a commercial using people of all races each holding bottles of Coke and were singing "I'd Like To Teach The World To Sing" in perfect harmony like their races were displayed. It did not seem to cause too much racial tension, therefore, I believe they were successful.
Lynsey Simpson:
ReplyDelete1. He was promoting racial relations with Starbucks
2. "Shall We Overcome?" which alludes to overcoming racism
3. Opening in more urban neighborhoods
4. It means that the topic of racism isn't meant to be spoken of in certain places, and one of them is a coffee shop line.
5. One individual who used race relations was Jackie Robinson, who was the first African American MLB player. Robinson had to overcome many obstacles to play in the MLB, including people questioning his payments, getting hit by pitchers who were meaning to do so, rude fans, rude press, and having his wife have to go through all of the hate with him. His actions were ethical, because if he wouldn't have done that then MLB might still just have black players, because no one might have worked up the courage to try and play.
Carter Billings 3rd (1 He said that they believe that starting the conversation on race to get people thinking was the part that mattered the most. (2 The ads said shall we overcome, and what this alludes to is overcoming racial barriers in our society. (3 The company plans to expand into urban neighborhoods to hire around 10,000 youth along with an ad with Gannett Co.'s USA Today. (4 This means that they think that racism discussions do not belong in the coffee shop may be even in the service industry. I do agree with these people, I think that racism is such a big topic that it could make people uncomfortable and maybe even angry for the fact that they just want their stuff and to leave not to have a discussion on racism. (5 In ads from companies such as IKEA and Old Navy they depict biracial couples to show their support in the area of race. These types of ads are completely ethical through the way that they show support for no racial boundaries and for no discrimination . It is with ads like these that we look at to make a change.
ReplyDeleteLorenzo B. Winston:
ReplyDelete1. The reason for Starbucks conducting their “Race Together” campaign was to resolve racial stress one coffee cup at a time.
2. The full-page ads taken out by the company said "Shall We Overcome?" at centre page and "RaceTogether" and the Starbucks logo near the bottom. This phrase is alluding to all of the races and ethnicities in America (mainly African-American and Caucasian) to come together and to unite as one nation and love instead of hate and divide the nation into two.
3. The company’s future plans to continue the campaign are to expand into urban neighbourhoods, hire 10,000 “opportunity youth” over the next three years, and produce advertising on the campaign with Gannett Co.’s USA Today.
4. The complaint basically means that the coffee shop was starting a campaign that has nothing to do with what the actual business is about. It’s like they just picked a random topic (and the topic is such a relevant and sensitive topic) to motivate other about just so Starbucks can get more business, so they thought. Yes I agree with this because we live in a very judgmental society. People will take things to the extreme nowadays, especially with topics like this that has been going on for… EVER, basically. People are entitled to their own opinion when it comes to things like this and it could end up in a very unpleasant ending, especially for ANY company, which can be sued and forced to shut down and not exist anymore. But in the end I do like how Starbucks is going to continue this campaign outside of the coffee shop.
5. Singer, actor, and Oscar and Golden Globe award winner Common shares his opinions on racial relations on “The Daily Show.” He was being ethical saying that black people should extend a hand to whites and show love saying “Let’s forget about the past as much as we can and say, “Let’s move from where we are now,” instead of throwing a fist to whites saying “You did us wrong.”
Sydney Emmons
ReplyDelete1. Schultz said he is doing this because he believes it is what matters most right now, and he wants to sort out issues, and spread equality.
2. It said "Shall we overcome". This is alluding to the old civil rights song called "shall we overcome". This song was about how blacks were going to overcome racial injustice.
3. To keep encouraging employees to spread equality, and hire 10,000 people from urban neighborhoods.
4. This means that Starbucks isn't the right place to discuss affairs like this.I don't agree with this at all. I have my opinion and Starbucks employees have theirs, and I dont want to sit down and be pressured by all the "Race Together" crap, when Starbucks isnt even in the position to discuss sensitive things like this.Starbucks is a restaurant, so if i go, I expect to get my coffee and leave, not discuss race. This idea is completely inappropriate and dumb.
5. An example of this would be Al Sharpton. Al would scope out companies to see if they were being racist and if he thought your corporation was in any way, he would force you to pay donations to his National Action Network. If you paid him enough, he would either give you support or silence. This gave him an advantage because he earned a load of money for his network, just by criticizing companies and getting in their business. I think it was really wrong and very unethical!
Emily Keller
ReplyDelete1) he believes that it is an important topic to talk about
2) "shall we overcome"; the recent events occurring with the death of black males, killed by police
3) expanding into urban neighborhoods, hiring 10,000 opportunity employees, and creating ads with Gannett CO's USA Today.
4) that people should leave controversial topics like race out of everyday activities like drinking coffee. no because if we don't talk about topics like those in everyday activities then the problems will never be solved.
5) I had a hard time finding a company that made a campaign solely directed towards race, more companies that "accidentally" were racist in an ad or a product. I'm sure I've just been spending the last hour and a half searching In all the wrong places. But, I'm not going to leave this question empty. A company that I found who was producing racially questionable products is a clothing store named Zara. They've released a purse with swastikas on it, a blue and white striped t-shirt with a six pointed star on the chest, and a necklace depicting black slave women. Although Zara released statements that all of these products were simply innocent mistake, it seems that after multiple offences they would be more careful.
MacKenzie Jones
ReplyDelete1) He wanted it to spark conversations amongst individuals who share the love for their products or just people in general, also the baristas and customers by explaining what the phrase means.
2) "Shall we over come at the center page, and "RaceTogether" with the starbucks logo at the bottom. Equality between all races.
3) They plan to produce advertising on the campaign with Gannett Co.’s USA Today, also hire over 10,000 "opportunity youth" over the next three years.
4) This means they went much to far in trying to encourage equality. I understand what they're trying to do, which is to encourage others to love everyone and not be racist. But this approach is not the best necessarily in my opinion, because everyone is entitled to have their own opinion and thoughts which some peoples are being racist. Trying to force someone to go against what they believe by shoving it in their face is no a way to try and spread equality in my opinion. Maybe if they just had a poster up in the shop with the phrase on it that might be slightly better, some people would still backlash but less I think because its not forcing you to look at it every time you look at your nice beverage.
5) An online company called FCKH8 started selling t-shirts and several other products with the saying “Racism isn’t over. But I’m over racism,” on them, these products were launched with a video titled "Hey White People," and includes a few children from Ferguson speaking about racism. $5 from each T-shirt, hoodie and tank top sold were donated to anti-racist organizations such as NAACP and the Mike Brown Memorial Fund. This companies campaign recived a huge backlash from people and also other companies.
Several people stated they were trying to make money off of Ferguson, and pointed out that they never started a race campaign until Ferguson so they didn't seem that concerned about it until a racist situation went national. Also a blog titled StopFCKH8 has documented multiple cases when FCKH8’s social media presence was felt to be sexist, racist or exclusionary toward marginalized sections of the queer community.
“The very popular “Nobody Knows I’m Trans” T-shirt has been flying off our warehouse shelves for over a year,” they stated. But, if you look at the listing on their website, it’s easy to see why some LGBT people object to the shirt. Not only is it listed as a “women’s” shirt, but some transgender individuals would face serious real-life danger just by wearing the shirt in public. While it may sell well, the popularity of the shirt doesn’t magically take away the offence it has caused to other people.
Jailen Stockdale
ReplyDelete1. The company wanted to get people talking about racial issues all over the country.
2. They said Race Together, it is alluding to the fight to try and bring together races like with the Civil Rights Movement.
3. They plan to expand and reach out into more urban areas and hire 100,000 opportunity youth.
4. The critics were saying the topics such as race didn’t belong in a coffee shop and basically that Starbucks should just be focusing on coffee. I don’t really agree with this because I feel that racism is an issue and the Starbucks Company has the right to strike up a nation-wide discussion on the subject in order to move forward and figure out a solution. I feel like even though they did not get that many positive responses, they still saw the results they wanted in just causing people to talk about it and no longer avoid the uncomfortable topic.
5. The NBA does a fully-integrated Hispanic marketing campaign that celebrates the league’s Latin heritage called Noche Latina. They celebrate the diverse population of the association by getting special uniforms printed with the teams’ name in Spanish (i.e. El Heat, Los Spurs, Nueva York) and having a series of in-arena festivities and telecasts. I feel that they are ethical in doing this because not only are they promoting the league but they are also paying tribute to the players of Latin origin and celebrating their heritage.
Abbye Blocker
ReplyDelete1. Howard Schultz's reasoning for conducting the "Race Together" campaign was to raise awareness on racial issues and problems and allowing employees and customers to talk about racial issues and concerns.
2. The ads included the phrase, "Shall we overcome?", which means will people overcome racial tendencies and problems within their community.
3. The company's future plans to expand the campaign are to go into urban neighborhoods, hire 10,000 "opportunity youth" within the next three years, and acquire advertising with USA Today.
4. The critics are basically saying that Starbucks is simply putting their nose where it is not belong. I do believe that Starbucks was not overstepping their boundaries because they had good intentions in trying to eliminate racism because they do not want people to judge and dislike others just because of their skin color.
5. Martin Luther King Jr. used race relations to bring people together and emphasize the fact that all men were born equal. He brought hundreds of African American people together for speeches and marches to show that they would stand together because they wanted to be treated fairly and eliminate racism.
Josie Parham
ReplyDelete1- Because he thought that this issue in America is more important then just selling cofee and it needs to be heard.
2- "Race Together" it mans that we should ignore the color of others skin and their race and come together and work together.
3- They plan to open up Starbucks in more urban areas and hire 10,000 opportunity youth over the next 3 years and advertise the campaign on Gannett Co's USA Today.
4- It means that Starbucks is here to sell coffee not start a world wide campaign on the very sensitive issue of race. I partially agree because yes, Starbucks is here to sell coffee and wen i go in there i want just coffee and they may lose some customers and maybe even gain some but, it is a very sensitive that needs but probably never will be resolved.
5- The UK (United Kingdom) passed a act called the Race Relations Act in 1976 which passed a series of laws on racial grounds forbidding any type of racial discrimination and was repealed in 2010 by the Equality Act. I think they were ethical in this decision because they made many people happy within their government, solved MANY problems that would of came down the road, and made themselves look very good while doing it because it was such a smart thing to do.
Kayla fincher
ReplyDelete1.he wanted to create a dialog
2. shall we overcome. to overcome discrimination due to race
3. they plan on holding more race together activities, expanding urban neighborhoods, an d hire opportunity youth
4.that they shouldn't be discussing sensitive material such as race because it isn't there place to and it really doesn't have any place to talk about the matters. I don't agree with this because if a company feels like something needs to be done to help out they should be able to as long as it isn't just for the gain of the company.
5.in 2013 dunking donuts in Thailand launched a "charcoal donut" with the advertisement as a black face makeup woman bright pink lipstick and a jet black 1950s-style beehive hairdo holding the black donut. The us franchises immediately responded with an apology for offending people a deputy of the Asian rights what stated "It's both bizarre and racist that Dunkin' Donuts thinks that it must color a woman's skin black and accentuate her lips with bright pink lipstick to sell a chocolate doughnut," I don't believe that dunking donuts was right for launching this campaign
Ke-Anna' Rich: 1. He wanted to get people thinking by stating something that would cause commotion.
ReplyDelete2. "Shall We Overcome?"- Completely abolishing racism
3. Advertising and spreading the message to other neighborhoods and helping underprivileged children.
4. That since Starbucks is such a well known business, they were being insensitive by taking such important issues and serving coffee with it. I don't agree, because there is nothing wrong with talking about relevant issues that can easily be stopped if someone would just speak up about them, and it does not matter who gets the point across as long as they go about it in the right way.
5. The movie 'Dear White People' puts a satirical on how two separate races, blacks and whites, see each other. While not completely unethical some could consider it as such since it makes fun of a topic of high importance.
Abbey Kate Gregory
ReplyDelete1. Howard Schultz wanted to encourage discussion and spark dialogue about race. Or, to be perfectly honest, to get attention.
2. It said "Shall We Overcome?" and "RaceTogether". The phrase is alluding that we have race issues in our country and is questioning our ability to overcome it.
3. The company plans to expand into urban neighborhoods, hire 10,000 “opportunity youth” in upcoming years and produce advertising on the campaign with Gannett Co.’s USA Today.
4. When people say Starbucks was "overstepping its boundaries " they mean that it was not their place to shove their ideas on other people like they did. I disagree with the critics when they say the company should have boundaries because the company should be able to do what they want; but if costumers are not comfortable going there then they can go elsewhere and Starbucks will suffer that consequence.
5.While most black Civil Rights leaders have done a great service in in the Civil Rights Movement, others, such as Jesse Jackson and Louis Farrakhan seem to keep racial tensions alive by claiming racism in about every situation to keep their status and prosperity, therefore, misusing their reputation as Civil Rights leaders.
Olivia LeComte
ReplyDelete1. To bring the topic and bring attention to it.
2. Shall we overcome? It is alluding to if we will overcome the heavy issue of racism.
3. To go into more urban neighborhoods and higher “opportunity youth”
4. People thought that it wasn't any of Starbucks’s business to bring this topic into their stores. I believe that someone does need to bring attention to these types of problems and Starbucks has the fan base and consumer group to help get the conversation started.
5. In 2014 Coke released a 90 second ad of many different people of many different ethnicities singing America the beautiful. This was meant to show people from all different ethnic backgrounds singing about how wonderful America is and enjoying the product. This was supposed to bring everyone into common ground. Many people got upset because people were singing this song in languages other than English. I believe that it was ethical because they got a lot of negative feedback and brought attention to a still present group of people in America who are racist.
Alex Turner 3rd period
ReplyDelete1. He's saying that maybe by encouraging talking about racial issues.
2." Shall we overcome?" The ad is inferring to the unfair treatment of different races and asking let's be better than this and try to make all equal.
3. They plan to expand into urban neighborhoods, produce advertising on the campaign with Gannet Co.'s USA Today, and in the next three years hire 10,000 "opportunity youth."
4. It means that it's too sensitive of a subject to be advertised in a coffee shop. I absolutely do not agree. We are such a bipolar society. Really. We don't want the struggle of race equality to be known because its a touchy subject in our culture which makes us jump down anyone's throat who even mentions it. Especially a "coffee shop" to give you some further insight about that "coffee shop" it's a multi billion dollar company that has over 11,000 shops in the US alone i don't see the flaw. But our society doesn't have a problem endorsing rap songs that that have the offensive N word every other word. If we want to make a change with it we need to stop ruling out the only people trying to help.
5. http://www.thewire.com/national/2013/01/brief-history-racist-soft-drinks/61515/
This short article describes the use of race in the targeting of advertising by soft drinks to increase their market with minorities. It's mostly about Coke and Pepsi, and I think as long as it didn't promote discrimination against minorities, it seems ethical. For these companies, it seemed to be all about increasing their profits with a wider use of their product, which included reaching minority audiences that their own research departments indicated were not typically drinking their brand. One example was:
Sprite went after the inner city youth demographic (inferred to be blacks and Hispanics) with a massive basketball-based campaign.
Zahrah Abdulrauf
ReplyDelete1. Howard Schultz decided to use the very real problem of racism in America as a tacky sales ploy. How do they expect their mostly white, untrained baristas to lead difficult and important discussions on race? They can't, but these fancy "socially aware" napkins should make up for their many lawsuits over their continued racial discrimination and white gentrification! "We're ready to talk about race! Please don't mention our 1994 $54M racial discrimination settlement!" What a joke.
2. "Shall We Overcome," alluding to "We Shall Overcome" a protest song that became a key anthem of the African Civil Rights Movement.
3. They have plans to expand into urban neighbourhoods, hire 10,000 “opportunity youth” over the next three years, and produce advertising on the campaign with Gannett Co.’s USA Today. They want to open more shops in "disadvantaged urban communities"? Beautiful, yes lets continue to drive people out of their homes because of their increasing home value appreciation. They aren't doing this out of the kindness of their hearts, the Starbucks Effect is both widespread and well known. Open up a Starbucks in the ghetto. Wait for the homes to appreciate in value and in turn increase the local residents rent, eventually forcing them out of their homes when they can no longer pay it. How noble.
4. You know, maybe I just want to have a coffee with my friends in peace without having a white barista try to initiate a conversation about my race issues that they obviously know nothing about. "Oh yeah!!! I totally agree that #alllivesmatter!!! This must be making you feel pretty good about yourself huh?? Screw off." I think this is something where it's just clearly annoying. Maybe a black person just wants to move through life or buy a thing without people wanting to have a "discussion" about race so they feel better about themselves. Starbucks #RaceTogether: Making white people feel good about themselves for superficially talking about race since 2015. Obnoxious. Don't try to make issues that are very real into a pathetic marketing tactic. Race and racism cannot be simplified into a corporate campaign. It's exploitation, plain and simple. Look at your history and your all white leadership team you "champions of diversity"! Not sure what they were thinking in the first place, I don't have time to explain 400 years of oppression to you and not be late for school. We all know that you don't want to talk.
5. Almost as egregious: Urban Outfitters. Several instances of cultural appropriation and insensitivity over the years has earned them a spot up there with Starbucks. They have
1) Designed ans sold a gray and white tapestry with pink triangles on it, made after the clothing Nazis forced gay prisoners to wear in concentration camps.
2) They actually let a vintage bloodstained Kent State sweatshirt be sold in store. Not a race issue, but just showing how familiar UO is with exploring the outer reaches of bad taste.
3) "Navajo" fashion. They had a clothing line that appropriated African culture, pinning the name of the Navajo Nations on products ranging from horribly overpriced skirts to hipster panties.
I have yet to find a business that has actually used race relations in a good way (because it isn't possible, stop trying to turn real issues into marketing ploys), but at least most can understand the fact that if you try to exploit issues like that, it isn't gong to end well, unlike Starbucks that thinks it's a great idea to make a pasty teenage barista talk about race with a white woman in Lululemon pants while pouring pumpkin spice. These are definitely people whose opinions on race I want to be forced to listen to on my day off. Thank you for making me a vehicle for your white guilt, Starbucks. Marvelous.
Grace Singley
ReplyDelete1. Howard Schultz's reasoning for Starbucks organizing their "Race Together" campaign is because they believe what matters the most is for their employees to discuss race issues with their customers.
2. It said "Shall We Overcome?" And "Race Together" with the Starbucks logo. This ad is trying to increase awareness on race relations in America.
3. The company's future plans are to try to expand into urban neighborhoods, hire 10,000 "opportunity youth" in the next three years, and advertise the campaign on USA Today.
4. They're saying that Starbucks is just a coffee shop to get coffee, not a place to go talk about sensitive topics like race/cultural. I can see what they mean because really that's not a coffee shops place to bring out this discussion and it could be taking extra long to get a cup of coffee because the employers are talking to customers. However, someone needs to talk about this. Even though it's a touchy subject to some people, it's still a problem in our world that needs to be changed; so what's the problem with Starbucks talking about it?
5. Miss Black USA pageant company has used the color of their skin to their advantage to make a whole different pageant, other than Miss America, that is designed only for black women. Their reasoning for creating this pageant or campaign is to encourage and lift up self-esteem in African American girls. I think they were ethical about this because they wanted to "redefine what it means to be a courageous, compassionate, & CONFIDENT black women today."
Kat Phillips
ReplyDelete1. he said that some viewed it as stepping over the line and how it offended some people
2. Race together it was supposed to mean together they stand n matter races.
3. they want to influence the community and get teens involved to help make it work.
4.it means that some believe that Starbucks had no right to cross over a sensitive line in our culture today. i disagree because Starbucks saw a problem with division in our society and wanted to make a change for the better whats so bad about that.
5. one corporation has been museums such as the Birmingham muesem displaying civil right stuff to bring in curious people of certin races to promote business.
Shalyn Dale
ReplyDelete1) He was saying that the conversation about race had to be started by someone so why not talk about it over a cup of starbucks :)
2) It said "We shall overcome." Alluding to the old Negro spiritual "We Shall Overcome" or possibly to the question "Can we overcome discrimination?"
3) Schultz said Starbucks plans more “Race Together” activities, including efforts to expand into urban neighbourhoods, hire 10,000 “opportunity youth” over the next three years.
4) I guess they were saying that Starbucks had no right to campaign and advertise racial things but I completely disagree. Who are they to tell them they can't express their feelings on racial injustice? If people can talk about politics and science in church or vice versa, then why can't they talk about race in a coffee shop?
5) Cheerios used a mixed family to incorporate that Cheerios are heart healthy but in doing so many African Americans and Caucasians were offended.
James Smelley
ReplyDelete1. To promote racial equality
2. They said "Shall we overcome?" It was alluding to recent issues involving racial equality.
3. They want to expand into urban neighborhoods and "hire 10,000 'opportunity youth' over the next three years."
4. The critics believe that a coffee company has nothing to do with any racist issues, so they should not be trying to affect the public. I believe that Starbucks has a right to write whatever they want on their cups, but what they are writing is only wasting ink, because they'll never actually affect anyone's decisions.
5. Some utility companies lowering the price of installing solar energy for people that have been racially abused.
Tyler Dempsey (Pimpsey)
ReplyDeleteI- To promote a sense of equality where it can easily gain attention.
II- "Shall we overcome?" and "RaceTogether". The phrase alludes to their desire to eliminate racial prejudice.
III- To create new opportunities for older adolescents and young adults. "efforts to expand into urban neighbourhoods, hire 10,000 'opportunity youth' over the next three years, and produce advertising on the campaign with Gannett Co.’s USA Today."
IV- In layman's terms, the companies are saying that Starbucks has no business in the fight on racism. I disagree, if nobody else is taking steps to stop this, it does some good to give it so much popularity to promote equality.
V- This article isn't really about racism as much as it is about human rights. http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/03/19/chick-fil-a-ceo-cathy-gay-marriage-still-wrong-but-ill-shut-up-about-it-and-sell-chicken/
Chickfila's CEO was very homophobic a few years back but above that, a firm Christian. Of course this /martyr/ did not like the thought of same-sex marriage and was getting quite a lot of hate for it. He closed CHFA on Sundays also. In hindsight, he believed it was unethical and overall, a poor decision.
Troy Banks
ReplyDelete1. He hoped that that it would spark conversation on the topic of race, and hopefully spread outside of coffee shops.
2. It said "Shall We Overcome?" which is alluding to the song "We Shall Overcome" which was a popular protest song during the civil rights era.
3. They plan to expand into urban neighborhoods, hire "opportunity youth," and display more ads in USA Today.
4. I think that by this the critics mean that a coffee shop has no place in society to start dialog about something as large as the topic of race. I disagree, because if it doesn't start somewhere as casual as a coffee shop, then where does it start? It seems that people put it off for petty reasons instead of facing the inevitable. We have to start somewhere.
5. In an interview with Raven-Symone, Oprah jumped out of her seat when the actress said some things on race that Oprah was surprised by. Raven said, "I'm tired of being labeled. I'm an American. I'm not an African-American, I'm an American." Oprah responded by saying, "Oh, girl, don't set Twitter on fire. Oh my lord, what did you just say?" This is one instance where Oprah can be seen race-baiting, and unethically, of course. Instead of sympathizing with the young actress' opinion, she jumps out of her seat, telling the actress to watch out for the backlash she will indefinitely receive.