June 11, 2012
WSJ Columnist: Penney’s Too Gay for Straight Shoppers
Forget the explanations from Wall Street analysts and retail industry experts about why J.C. Penney is having so many problems since Ron Johnson took over at the chain. Poor sales have nothing to do with confusion over Penney’s new pricing strategy, ineffective advertising, tepid reaction to its product selection and low morale among employees.
No, Al Lewis a columnist for Dow Jones Newswires writing on The Wall Street Journal website says Penney is hurting because of its open embrace and support of gays. Firstly, the retailer hired former J.C. Penney clerk and current megastar Ellen DeGeneres as its spokesperson. Then it began using same-sex couples and their kids in ads and catalogs.
The ultra-conservative One Million Moms (40,000 actual members) called for a boycott of Penney when Ms. DeGeneres was first named spokesperson, but the group abandoned the effort shortly thereafter when its leadership realized the effort was going nowhere.
Now comes Mr. Lewis to say that J.C. Penney’s values do not reflect those of its shoppers. He writes, "I have never actually met an openly gay person who openly shops at J.C. Penney."
There was no indication in his column as to how many openly gay people Mr. Lewis knows in his private life or the number of conversations he may have had with them on their shopping habits. Similarly, Mr. Lewis does not reveal how much time he has spent at J.C. Penney stores around the country surveying shoppers on their sexuality.
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Discussion Questions: Has J.C. Penney’s support for gay rights hurt it with heterosexuals relative to similar support of gay rights from rival retailers such as Macy’s and Target? Do you think that Penney’s efforts has/will lead to an increase in gays who shop in its stores and on its website?
Poll
Outrageous commentary and premise.
Ellen is an entertainer who is gay, much loved and appeals to ALL. This poorly written opinion citing an ultra-right wing group and trying to connect the dots to falling sales shows a quantum leap to conclusions.
To say that JCP is marketing only to gays is about as out of touch as Ron Johnson’s visible approach to the highest profile makeover in department store history.
First of all, somebody needs to (very quietly) take all the sharp objects off Al Lewis’ desk.
He can’t be serious.
Ellen DeGeneres is America’s lesbian next door, so wholesome she charms (Mr. Lewis obviously aside) the most homophobic souls out there. After nine years or so her show is still attracting almost three million viewers an episode. Her well scrubbed good looks are great for Cover Girl sales (although perhaps Mr. Lewis believes all those cosmetics are being purchased by armies of Ellen-obsessed transvestites). I mean, hey now, we’re talking about Ellen here! How much less threatening and offensive could one gay person get?
J.C. Penny’s problems have nothing to do with Ellen. Hiring her was a great move. She’s like the target market — plain, unassuming, funny, a little bit quirky and she loves to dance.
I suggest J.C. Penny rethink its merchandising position, rehire Ellen for another round of commercials, and that we all take up a collection for Brother Lewis who may just need a few dance lessons to get rid of that inner homophobe.
Come on Al — loosen up. It won’t kill you and, who knows, you might like it.
A lot of recent polling on the subject of gay marriage indicates that Americans are further ahead of most marketers on this subject, and more tolerant than you might expect. Nevertheless, there is a difference between using a mainstream celebrity like Ellen DeGeneres and the “statement advertising” implied by the use of a gay couple and their children. When JCP is struggling on a lot of fronts, taking a position that many of its more traditional customers are likely to oppose may be a risk worth avoiding right now.
I know this is true. And I certainly believe in first amendment rights. But, I can not comprehend this kind of reaction. This is the way people think in the countries we detest the most.
I hope JCP stays the course. I hope Macy’s and Target openly adopt this type of position.
While I have not shopped at JCP in 20 or 30 years, now at least I will look at their flyers that normally end up in the recycle bin.
You’ve gotta love the WSJ these days. A Murdoch rag through and through.
I think it might do Mr. Lewis well to read a “gay” publication. He might be surprised to see how many retail and hospitality companies are courting all that disposable income.
But let’s take a look at this article from another angle. The Holy Grail these days is Millenials. Mid-line department stores court them — Macy’s vocally so. Until now, JCP has not done a very good job of courting those millenials. And guess what? Millenials couldn’t care less about color and sexual orientation. After all, a lot of them have grown up in same-sex couple households. That’s just the facts, ma’am. And they have passels of multi-racial friends.
So…if your goal is to court the Millenials and divest yourself of the 70 year-old crowd, this is a good way to do it.
In that context, is Mr. Lewis wrong? Not entirely in the short-term. But is he off the mark? Totally.
Does any of this have much to do with JCP’s eventual success or failure? Not particularly. The marketing campaign is still out of tune.
In a word, ludicrous. I thought when you first enter journalism school you are taught that the proper way to research a story was from all angles/sources and have your facts straight (sorry for the pun, too easy to pass up). Searching for reasons why JCP or for that matter any other company selling goods and services to a diverse population is having a tough patch and coming up with this one boggles the mind.
WSJ should stick to the world of business and finance — leave the analysis on marketing and advertising practices to the experts in other publications and web blogs who understand the process of corporate decision making regarding communication strategy/tactics, and the motivations behind selecting a spokesperson, imagery, lifestyle, etc.
Writing an article with a baseless foundation other than a splinter group and printing it within a publication that prior to Murdoch/News Corp getting his hands on it was the gold standard of professional journalism is a sad commentary on the struggles WSJ has encountered in recent years.
Seriously? Ellen DeGeneres certainly has not hurt sales of Cover Girl cosmetics and I have never associated Cover Girl as a gay product and never thought of JCP as now supporting gay rights. The strategy and promotion for JCP is not working because it does not connect with their traditional consumers and has not yet brought in enough new consumers to take their place.
There’s a comedian that uses the line “You can’t fix stupid.” The following quote from the piece fits that category.
“I have never actually met an openly gay person who openly shops at J.C. Penney.”
Does Mr. Lewis believe that “openly gay” persons wear a sticker on their forehead to identify themselves?
This may be one of the most ignorant pieces I’ve read in a very long time.
I may be ignorant as well, however, I believe that a consumer is a consumer. The needs are relatively similar regardless of any type of classification that we’d like to place upon them. Organizations such as “One Million Moms” got their fifteen minutes. If these types of groups had any real influence, retailers like A&F wouldn’t be around either. They don’t. Misguided efforts are just that — misguided. However, I do wonder if the power of 40,000 moms was focused on something positive what impact they could actually have — in a good way. That being the case, they actually might grow to a million or more.
Right now, JCP is floundering because the consumer is wondering where their coupons are and what happened to their favorite products. They were trained to shop JCP in a certain way. Consumers learn to shop retailers the way they are trained and in response to the expectations they have over time.
Right now, the consumer is not sure. JCP is not sure. Anything else is media fodder and matters little to the average consumer.
The writer’s point is that JCP is alienating its customers, which recent sales figures bear out. 60% of that alienation probably comes from their new pricing strategy, and 40% from cheap products and poor execution. For every anti-gay shopper that leaves JCP, there’s an open-minded one that wants to start shopping there, but then they experience the aforementioned issues and bail.
Ron Johnson needs to focus on the real issue, which I believe he’s doing — it just takes time.
Will this kind of homophobic screech hurt JCP? JCP may lose some sales from the extremists that have the free time to spend judging others that don’t look at life the way that the extremists do. The larger question is whether this is enough people to significantly matter. Given Ellen’s popularity, my guess is no.
JCP has bigger issues to address.
Well thank you Al Lewis for “clearing” that up for the rest of us that had no clue or any concern whatsoever, for J.C. Penney’s views on gay rights. Yes, Mr. Lewis, you might be correct, in that perhaps the members of the extreme right wing lunatic fringe might be shopping elsewhere. Good grief, save me from the “good” people!
It is pathetic that in this day and age that this “story” would even be a discussion point. WSJ along with all the Murdoch/Fox News related media deserves to be as summarily ignored as this article. Let it go people, let it go.
Really?!…Isn’t money green, not matter who’s spending it? Maybe gays should stop shopping at retailers that market and advertise to heterosexuals!
The leap(s) in logic put forth by this piece are astounding. Next thing you know, so-called “experts” like Mr. Lewis will be claiming that retail sales across the U.S. are suffering because the major retailers are marketing to multicultural segments…or G-d forbid, even worse, in languages other than English.
The whole premise of this column is offensive. What’s next — assertions that Penney’s ads are too black? Too white? Too Catholic? I’m pretty sure that JCP wants customers’ money, no matter what they look like.
Yikes — not certain if Mr. Lewis has an “agenda” item here or not. One way or the other, his opinion is less about news, and more about gossip.
Lewis may be correct in his statement that Johnson and Penney are confusing their current customer base with merchandising and pricing strategies, but he is likely guilty of attempting to bolster views to his blog with his cheap headline and lead to his story.
OMG! Just because Ellen happens to have an alternative sexual preference does not mean that is who she is. Our Ellen is everybody’s best friend or at least everybody would like it that way. We listen to her for a laugh, for a touch at the heart strings, to meet the real actors and actresses as who they are and of course to dance. Penney’s selection of Ellen says nothing about their support of gay rights and everything about their ability to reach a person who influences so many of their customers. Kudos to them!
Successful retail brands are not created by advertising, regardless of the spokesperson. You might get consideration, but shopper engagement sets retail brands (bricks, clicks, calls).
I do find JCP’s voice as becoming shrill. Look at yesterday’s insert. It is pulling out all the stops in its attempt to appeal to everyone. Okay I am a cynic, but casting must be a laborious process in order to complete the diversity matrix. This is all a distraction and proof Johnson doesn’t get mall based department store branding. Mid-market consumers, regardless of demography, are looking for the best deal.
Mr. Retailer, tell your value proposition story in clear and easily understandable terms that are relevant to your target audience. Sure, build in a creative hook. But after knocking off Target in design tone and manner and supporting alternative lifestyles, there is no there there for brand JCP.
Don’t take “Here’s to the crazy ones…” too literally. It is not supposed to refer to the CEO of the company. Or as we like to say, “retail ain’t for sissies.”
The ultra conservative WSJ is only a few editorials away from FOX news in terms of any credibility whatsoever pertaining to gay (or other civil) rights. That said, I do not believe JCP’s catering to the GLBT market will be enough to save the troubled chain, although I do believe it is a step in the right direction of creating SOME identity. More broadly, if JCP does go down, it will have little to do with JCP’s rejection of anti gay bigotry, and the venerable chain will at least be retiring on the right side of history.
I checked out Mr. Lewis on LinkedIn. His background doesn’t surprise me. In his photo, he’s throwing an eight-ball into the air. Looks openly gay to me.
I just wish that I could read the entire op-ed piece on the WSJ, but their publication and business is just too “straight” for me. I just don’t know any gay people who read the WSJ. Really!?!?!?!?
I love it when businesses do the right thing — it almost always translates into success down the road. Witness the flogging this forum gave Patagonia several months ago. The results from news articles in March:
“Executives said the company had $540 million in sales in the 12 months that ended in April, an increase of more than 30 percent over the same period a year earlier. Furthermore, they said, Patagonia has doubled revenue and tripled profit since 2008.”
I know I am mixing my issues here, but the point of retailing is to know your customer and do right by them. You can define accordingly, but JCP simply needs to figure out the promotional mix (and quick). Airing and ad with gay parents? Come on — the top rated comedy on TV has two of them.
Whoa, people! Cut me a break here. If y’all make all of the intelligence and insightful comments, what’s left for someone late to the discussion to say? Tone down the intelligence people and leave some clever stuff for others to say.
🙂
Not sure many of you actually read the WSJ op-ed before commenting on this blog.
Too many of us engage their “homophobic radar” whenever someone simply asks a legitimate question. Is this to simply stifle a free and open dialogue or to make oneself sound more enlightened and worldly?
Al Lewis asks a legitimate question. Personally, I believe Ellen is a non-issue. She is popular because she isn’t defined by her lesbianism. However, to have a gay couple in a circular and refer to them specifically in the copy is a definite line in the sand. JCP is attempting to re-configure their customer base. Clearly, there is no doubt on this.
Lewis’ point is simply: Are their enough gay parents or straight sympathizers in the US willing to shop at JCP to offset the current customers deciding that JCP is no longer for them?
My opinion is that JCP’s goose has been cooking for quite some time. Johnson is taking a risk, which I am sure is the reason he is there. It probably won’t work, but I seriously doubt it will be because he highlighted the gay community in his ads.
But we shouldn’t castigate a writer for addressing this topic. And the WSJ was asking these questions long before Murdoch bought it.
I wrote a response and hit the “send” button too soon. I am not sure why we are responding to this article. Haven’t we passed this type discussion? Why would we validate the writer by responding? Yet here I am writing a response and disturbed that this is still a subject. Why do we care what Penney’s is doing? Haven’t they made enough marketing and product mistakes already? Let’s don’t pile on. Let them die in peace.
Sadly, small splinter groups know that they can leverage the “tyranny of the noisiest” to drive retailers to cave to their demands. And these efforts are tricky for retailers to negotiate.
So while I think Penney’s latest ads are poorly messaged, the challenge in their ads isn’t Ellen nor is their open-ness to portraying a diverse world.
This, at least, Penney seems to have right, at this point. They are hiring good people (Ellen) and showing real life in their catalogs.
I’m not sure I agree with the premise of the question (that “JCP [has demonstrated] support for gay rights”), but of course it’s really a non-issue: those here who actually read Mr. Lewis’ piece – and yes, it followed the Murdoch formula of sensible material encased in a sensationalist wrapper — quickly came across his main point:
“Mr. Johnson is alienating Penney’s traditional customers in a bid to attract new customers from higher socioeconomic segments that now shop Macy’s, Nordstrom and Target.”
My take on the DeGeneres-centered campaign is that it’s problematic: celebrities are always iffy choices, and comedians — or comediennes, in this case — are particularly so since the audience may react to, and reject, the person rather than the product. It’s also confusing and sloppily executed: I recall one spot in which a Dickens’ era character is told a price is “Four-ninety-nine” (or whatever) , but as Britain at the time didn’t used a decimalized currency, it doesn’t make sense; admittedly this is a fine point that few would notice, but to me it’s an inattention to detail that’s telling. I doubt Steve Jobs would approve.
Hetero Mom of 19-going-on-29 yr old comfortably gay son here:
Mr. Lewis mentions 3 phrases that tell the tale: “middlebrow demographic,” “stodgy retailer,” and “perceived coolness.” Because of the first two, my son would not have been caught dead in a JCP store since his middle school years — and if Mr. Lewis has been unable to spot the forehead stickers, perhaps it’s because anyone gay/fashion-forward would’ve been there under duress and a paper bag. But both of us thoroughly enjoy the TV ads — with or without Ellen — they’re just bright, funny and very well done, and they’ve managed to exponentially ramp up the “perceived coolness” factor in both our eyes. Now when I watch a JCP ad all the way to the end and see a blouse I’d actually go try on, he might — might — come with me, and as a reliable, and ahead-of-the-trend fashion advisor, he’d be invaluable!
Every retailer goes through this sooner or later. Bottom line, there is not a significant group of shoppers that care one way or the other. Penney’s probably loves this because they can blame all their failures on this and not their core issues.
Ron Johnson, J.C. Penney’s CEO, just can’t stay off of the wire. Every thing he does generates a very large amount of scrutiny and criticism. At the present time I don’t think he can turn his image around in time to gain the ground he needs to get the company moving forward again. Penney’s board of directors must be boycotting the media or still in with his plan to make things happen. Nothing about how this company is proceeding with needed repairs makes sense!
Opinions are opinions and observations are observations. Why the ad hominim attacks on Al Lewis for expressing his?
More Discussions
How Timely Is the Planned Lowe’s Website Renovation Focusing on Personalization?
Is Lowe’s being timely with its website reno, and is it right to be placed as…Should Costco Be Opening Members-Only Gas Stations?
Is this the right move for the warehouse club?As Boomers ‘Age Out of Peak Purchasing,’ How Can National Brands Retain Interest With Gen Z?
According to a recent First Insight study titled “Is Gen Z Still Choosing Your Brand,” while…
Outrageous commentary and premise.
Ellen is an entertainer who is gay, much loved and appeals to ALL. This poorly written opinion citing an ultra-right wing group and trying to connect the dots to falling sales shows a quantum leap to conclusions.
To say that JCP is marketing only to gays is about as out of touch as Ron Johnson’s visible approach to the highest profile makeover in department store history.
First of all, somebody needs to (very quietly) take all the sharp objects off Al Lewis’ desk.
He can’t be serious.
Ellen DeGeneres is America’s lesbian next door, so wholesome she charms (Mr. Lewis obviously aside) the most homophobic souls out there. After nine years or so her show is still attracting almost three million viewers an episode. Her well scrubbed good looks are great for Cover Girl sales (although perhaps Mr. Lewis believes all those cosmetics are being purchased by armies of Ellen-obsessed transvestites). I mean, hey now, we’re talking about Ellen here! How much less threatening and offensive could one gay person get?
J.C. Penny’s problems have nothing to do with Ellen. Hiring her was a great move. She’s like the target market — plain, unassuming, funny, a little bit quirky and she loves to dance.
I suggest J.C. Penny rethink its merchandising position, rehire Ellen for another round of commercials, and that we all take up a collection for Brother Lewis who may just need a few dance lessons to get rid of that inner homophobe.
Come on Al — loosen up. It won’t kill you and, who knows, you might like it.
A lot of recent polling on the subject of gay marriage indicates that Americans are further ahead of most marketers on this subject, and more tolerant than you might expect. Nevertheless, there is a difference between using a mainstream celebrity like Ellen DeGeneres and the “statement advertising” implied by the use of a gay couple and their children. When JCP is struggling on a lot of fronts, taking a position that many of its more traditional customers are likely to oppose may be a risk worth avoiding right now.
I know this is true. And I certainly believe in first amendment rights. But, I can not comprehend this kind of reaction. This is the way people think in the countries we detest the most.
I hope JCP stays the course. I hope Macy’s and Target openly adopt this type of position.
While I have not shopped at JCP in 20 or 30 years, now at least I will look at their flyers that normally end up in the recycle bin.
You’ve gotta love the WSJ these days. A Murdoch rag through and through.
I think it might do Mr. Lewis well to read a “gay” publication. He might be surprised to see how many retail and hospitality companies are courting all that disposable income.
But let’s take a look at this article from another angle. The Holy Grail these days is Millenials. Mid-line department stores court them — Macy’s vocally so. Until now, JCP has not done a very good job of courting those millenials. And guess what? Millenials couldn’t care less about color and sexual orientation. After all, a lot of them have grown up in same-sex couple households. That’s just the facts, ma’am. And they have passels of multi-racial friends.
So…if your goal is to court the Millenials and divest yourself of the 70 year-old crowd, this is a good way to do it.
In that context, is Mr. Lewis wrong? Not entirely in the short-term. But is he off the mark? Totally.
Does any of this have much to do with JCP’s eventual success or failure? Not particularly. The marketing campaign is still out of tune.
In a word, ludicrous. I thought when you first enter journalism school you are taught that the proper way to research a story was from all angles/sources and have your facts straight (sorry for the pun, too easy to pass up). Searching for reasons why JCP or for that matter any other company selling goods and services to a diverse population is having a tough patch and coming up with this one boggles the mind.
WSJ should stick to the world of business and finance — leave the analysis on marketing and advertising practices to the experts in other publications and web blogs who understand the process of corporate decision making regarding communication strategy/tactics, and the motivations behind selecting a spokesperson, imagery, lifestyle, etc.
Writing an article with a baseless foundation other than a splinter group and printing it within a publication that prior to Murdoch/News Corp getting his hands on it was the gold standard of professional journalism is a sad commentary on the struggles WSJ has encountered in recent years.
Seriously? Ellen DeGeneres certainly has not hurt sales of Cover Girl cosmetics and I have never associated Cover Girl as a gay product and never thought of JCP as now supporting gay rights. The strategy and promotion for JCP is not working because it does not connect with their traditional consumers and has not yet brought in enough new consumers to take their place.
There’s a comedian that uses the line “You can’t fix stupid.” The following quote from the piece fits that category.
“I have never actually met an openly gay person who openly shops at J.C. Penney.”
Does Mr. Lewis believe that “openly gay” persons wear a sticker on their forehead to identify themselves?
This may be one of the most ignorant pieces I’ve read in a very long time.
I may be ignorant as well, however, I believe that a consumer is a consumer. The needs are relatively similar regardless of any type of classification that we’d like to place upon them. Organizations such as “One Million Moms” got their fifteen minutes. If these types of groups had any real influence, retailers like A&F wouldn’t be around either. They don’t. Misguided efforts are just that — misguided. However, I do wonder if the power of 40,000 moms was focused on something positive what impact they could actually have — in a good way. That being the case, they actually might grow to a million or more.
Right now, JCP is floundering because the consumer is wondering where their coupons are and what happened to their favorite products. They were trained to shop JCP in a certain way. Consumers learn to shop retailers the way they are trained and in response to the expectations they have over time.
Right now, the consumer is not sure. JCP is not sure. Anything else is media fodder and matters little to the average consumer.
The writer’s point is that JCP is alienating its customers, which recent sales figures bear out. 60% of that alienation probably comes from their new pricing strategy, and 40% from cheap products and poor execution. For every anti-gay shopper that leaves JCP, there’s an open-minded one that wants to start shopping there, but then they experience the aforementioned issues and bail.
Ron Johnson needs to focus on the real issue, which I believe he’s doing — it just takes time.
Will this kind of homophobic screech hurt JCP? JCP may lose some sales from the extremists that have the free time to spend judging others that don’t look at life the way that the extremists do. The larger question is whether this is enough people to significantly matter. Given Ellen’s popularity, my guess is no.
JCP has bigger issues to address.
Well thank you Al Lewis for “clearing” that up for the rest of us that had no clue or any concern whatsoever, for J.C. Penney’s views on gay rights. Yes, Mr. Lewis, you might be correct, in that perhaps the members of the extreme right wing lunatic fringe might be shopping elsewhere. Good grief, save me from the “good” people!
It is pathetic that in this day and age that this “story” would even be a discussion point. WSJ along with all the Murdoch/Fox News related media deserves to be as summarily ignored as this article. Let it go people, let it go.
Really?!…Isn’t money green, not matter who’s spending it? Maybe gays should stop shopping at retailers that market and advertise to heterosexuals!
The leap(s) in logic put forth by this piece are astounding. Next thing you know, so-called “experts” like Mr. Lewis will be claiming that retail sales across the U.S. are suffering because the major retailers are marketing to multicultural segments…or G-d forbid, even worse, in languages other than English.
The whole premise of this column is offensive. What’s next — assertions that Penney’s ads are too black? Too white? Too Catholic? I’m pretty sure that JCP wants customers’ money, no matter what they look like.
Yikes — not certain if Mr. Lewis has an “agenda” item here or not. One way or the other, his opinion is less about news, and more about gossip.
Lewis may be correct in his statement that Johnson and Penney are confusing their current customer base with merchandising and pricing strategies, but he is likely guilty of attempting to bolster views to his blog with his cheap headline and lead to his story.
OMG! Just because Ellen happens to have an alternative sexual preference does not mean that is who she is. Our Ellen is everybody’s best friend or at least everybody would like it that way. We listen to her for a laugh, for a touch at the heart strings, to meet the real actors and actresses as who they are and of course to dance. Penney’s selection of Ellen says nothing about their support of gay rights and everything about their ability to reach a person who influences so many of their customers. Kudos to them!
Successful retail brands are not created by advertising, regardless of the spokesperson. You might get consideration, but shopper engagement sets retail brands (bricks, clicks, calls).
I do find JCP’s voice as becoming shrill. Look at yesterday’s insert. It is pulling out all the stops in its attempt to appeal to everyone. Okay I am a cynic, but casting must be a laborious process in order to complete the diversity matrix. This is all a distraction and proof Johnson doesn’t get mall based department store branding. Mid-market consumers, regardless of demography, are looking for the best deal.
Mr. Retailer, tell your value proposition story in clear and easily understandable terms that are relevant to your target audience. Sure, build in a creative hook. But after knocking off Target in design tone and manner and supporting alternative lifestyles, there is no there there for brand JCP.
Don’t take “Here’s to the crazy ones…” too literally. It is not supposed to refer to the CEO of the company. Or as we like to say, “retail ain’t for sissies.”
The ultra conservative WSJ is only a few editorials away from FOX news in terms of any credibility whatsoever pertaining to gay (or other civil) rights. That said, I do not believe JCP’s catering to the GLBT market will be enough to save the troubled chain, although I do believe it is a step in the right direction of creating SOME identity. More broadly, if JCP does go down, it will have little to do with JCP’s rejection of anti gay bigotry, and the venerable chain will at least be retiring on the right side of history.
I checked out Mr. Lewis on LinkedIn. His background doesn’t surprise me. In his photo, he’s throwing an eight-ball into the air. Looks openly gay to me.
I just wish that I could read the entire op-ed piece on the WSJ, but their publication and business is just too “straight” for me. I just don’t know any gay people who read the WSJ. Really!?!?!?!?
I love it when businesses do the right thing — it almost always translates into success down the road. Witness the flogging this forum gave Patagonia several months ago. The results from news articles in March:
“Executives said the company had $540 million in sales in the 12 months that ended in April, an increase of more than 30 percent over the same period a year earlier. Furthermore, they said, Patagonia has doubled revenue and tripled profit since 2008.”
I know I am mixing my issues here, but the point of retailing is to know your customer and do right by them. You can define accordingly, but JCP simply needs to figure out the promotional mix (and quick). Airing and ad with gay parents? Come on — the top rated comedy on TV has two of them.
Whoa, people! Cut me a break here. If y’all make all of the intelligence and insightful comments, what’s left for someone late to the discussion to say? Tone down the intelligence people and leave some clever stuff for others to say.
🙂
Not sure many of you actually read the WSJ op-ed before commenting on this blog.
Too many of us engage their “homophobic radar” whenever someone simply asks a legitimate question. Is this to simply stifle a free and open dialogue or to make oneself sound more enlightened and worldly?
Al Lewis asks a legitimate question. Personally, I believe Ellen is a non-issue. She is popular because she isn’t defined by her lesbianism. However, to have a gay couple in a circular and refer to them specifically in the copy is a definite line in the sand. JCP is attempting to re-configure their customer base. Clearly, there is no doubt on this.
Lewis’ point is simply: Are their enough gay parents or straight sympathizers in the US willing to shop at JCP to offset the current customers deciding that JCP is no longer for them?
My opinion is that JCP’s goose has been cooking for quite some time. Johnson is taking a risk, which I am sure is the reason he is there. It probably won’t work, but I seriously doubt it will be because he highlighted the gay community in his ads.
But we shouldn’t castigate a writer for addressing this topic. And the WSJ was asking these questions long before Murdoch bought it.
I wrote a response and hit the “send” button too soon. I am not sure why we are responding to this article. Haven’t we passed this type discussion? Why would we validate the writer by responding? Yet here I am writing a response and disturbed that this is still a subject. Why do we care what Penney’s is doing? Haven’t they made enough marketing and product mistakes already? Let’s don’t pile on. Let them die in peace.
Sadly, small splinter groups know that they can leverage the “tyranny of the noisiest” to drive retailers to cave to their demands. And these efforts are tricky for retailers to negotiate.
So while I think Penney’s latest ads are poorly messaged, the challenge in their ads isn’t Ellen nor is their open-ness to portraying a diverse world.
This, at least, Penney seems to have right, at this point. They are hiring good people (Ellen) and showing real life in their catalogs.
I’m not sure I agree with the premise of the question (that “JCP [has demonstrated] support for gay rights”), but of course it’s really a non-issue: those here who actually read Mr. Lewis’ piece – and yes, it followed the Murdoch formula of sensible material encased in a sensationalist wrapper — quickly came across his main point:
“Mr. Johnson is alienating Penney’s traditional customers in a bid to attract new customers from higher socioeconomic segments that now shop Macy’s, Nordstrom and Target.”
My take on the DeGeneres-centered campaign is that it’s problematic: celebrities are always iffy choices, and comedians — or comediennes, in this case — are particularly so since the audience may react to, and reject, the person rather than the product. It’s also confusing and sloppily executed: I recall one spot in which a Dickens’ era character is told a price is “Four-ninety-nine” (or whatever) , but as Britain at the time didn’t used a decimalized currency, it doesn’t make sense; admittedly this is a fine point that few would notice, but to me it’s an inattention to detail that’s telling. I doubt Steve Jobs would approve.
Hetero Mom of 19-going-on-29 yr old comfortably gay son here:
Mr. Lewis mentions 3 phrases that tell the tale: “middlebrow demographic,” “stodgy retailer,” and “perceived coolness.” Because of the first two, my son would not have been caught dead in a JCP store since his middle school years — and if Mr. Lewis has been unable to spot the forehead stickers, perhaps it’s because anyone gay/fashion-forward would’ve been there under duress and a paper bag. But both of us thoroughly enjoy the TV ads — with or without Ellen — they’re just bright, funny and very well done, and they’ve managed to exponentially ramp up the “perceived coolness” factor in both our eyes. Now when I watch a JCP ad all the way to the end and see a blouse I’d actually go try on, he might — might — come with me, and as a reliable, and ahead-of-the-trend fashion advisor, he’d be invaluable!
Every retailer goes through this sooner or later. Bottom line, there is not a significant group of shoppers that care one way or the other. Penney’s probably loves this because they can blame all their failures on this and not their core issues.
Ron Johnson, J.C. Penney’s CEO, just can’t stay off of the wire. Every thing he does generates a very large amount of scrutiny and criticism. At the present time I don’t think he can turn his image around in time to gain the ground he needs to get the company moving forward again. Penney’s board of directors must be boycotting the media or still in with his plan to make things happen. Nothing about how this company is proceeding with needed repairs makes sense!
Opinions are opinions and observations are observations. Why the ad hominim attacks on Al Lewis for expressing his?