Starbucks lifts free newspaper ban
By TRAVIS PURSER
Express Staff Writer
Starbucks decision to repeal its nationwide ban on local free
newspapers being offered in its stores came not a moment too soon, because, in the words
of one Ketchum Starbucks employee, "People were flipping out!"
Corporate-wide Starbucks media relations representative Cindy Hoots said
in a telephone interview yesterday from Seattle that Starbucks president and chief
executive Orrin Smith reversed the ban late in September following opposition from store
employees and outcry from the media.
The local employee said she was happy about that decision. The ban,
scheduled to begin Oct. 1, was a bad idea, she said, because "drinking coffee and
reading the local paper is what a coffeehouse is all about."
Customers berated store employees when they found out about the ban, she
saidand some thought even reading the papers in the store would not be allowed.
Starbucks announced on Sept. 1 that it would no longer carry free papers
because the coffee company wanted to reduce "clutter" in its stores, according
to Hoots.
The ban followed a deal between the New York Times and Starbucks
that traded the papers advertising resources for the Times right to be
the only national paper sold in the coffee stores.
Starbucks media relations representative Alan Gulick, however, said in a
telephone message Friday that the Times deal had nothing to do with the free paper
ban.
In Ketchum, Starbucks has removed one local free paper to a rack just
outside its back door while another local paper is inside the front door.
The store manager declined to comment on which papers he would keep inside
the store now that the ban was lifted. He said all store employees had been instructed by
their corporate higher-ups not to answer questions from reporters.
Hoots said Starbucks implemented that policy "so we didnt have
everyone talking to the media [who] might not have the [right] information."
The employee who did talk to a reporter, however, said no one at the store
supported the ban because it hurt business and drew public criticism.
"Were nice," she said. "Were not like evil,
blood-sucking vampires, or something."