Connect with us

Did Buzzfeed’s Article Claiming Starbucks’ Holiday Cups ‘Might Have A Gay Agenda’ Create This Year’s Controversy?

Published

on

A Controversy That Wasn’t Really There?

Americans are pretty sick and tired of the annual #BoycottStarbucks campaigns conservatives start every year around this time when their favorite target – Starbucks – reveals its new Holiday coffee cups. We all remember the insane attacks in 2015 from former pastor Joshua Feuerstein, who recorded a viral video literally saying Starbucks “hates Jesus” because the international coffee purveyor produced a solid red cup without Christmas decorations.

For better or worse that was a national controversy – and a national conversation – that went on for weeks.

buzz.jpgPeople Are Saying Starbucks’ New Holiday Cup Is Totally Gay” is an article Buzzfeed business reporter Venessa Wong wrote that was published one week ago Wednesday. It was odd because the only people she mentioned in her article were a woman on Twitter with 737 followers who tweeted about the cups two weeks before Wong published her piece. Wong also cited a man on Twitter with 66 followers, another man with 18 followers, another woman with 103 follows, and Wong’s own “gay BuzzFeed colleague” as her sources.

Those are the people who were saying Starbucks’ new Holiday cup is “totally gay,” to quote Wong.

Less than an hour after Buzzfeed published their article Business Insider reported “BuzzFeed posted a bizarre theory that Starbucks’ holiday cups ‘might have a gay agenda’.” Apparently the original Buzzfeed title, according to Business Insider, was: “Is Starbucks’ New Holiday Cup Totally Gay?”

The theme of Wong’s story is, “the ordinary Starbucks customer probably didn’t realize the cup might have a gay agenda,” but “some keen observers speculated on Twitter that the two hands on the upper edge of the cup belong to a same-sex couple, holding hands like in the Starbucks’ holiday cup video.”

NCRM reported on that video weeks ago – it does include a same-sex couple, about to kiss.

Other media outlets quickly picked up the Buzzfeed report. A partial timeline, via a chronological sort of Google News:

“People Say Starbucks’ New Holiday Cups Have a ‘Gay Agenda'” (Grub Street)

“The Starbucks Holiday Cup Apparently Has A Gay Agenda And, Thank God, Everyone Is Chill About It (UpRoxx)

“Starbucks holiday cup causes social media buzz over mystery hands” (Fox News)

“Beware The Starbucks Holiday Cups’ Secret Gay Agenda!” (NewNowNext)

“Starbucks under fire over holiday cups that ‘feature same-sex couples’ hands” (The Independent)

“Is there a secret gay agenda on Starbucks’ Christmas cups?” (Pink News)

“People Are Arguing Over Whether Starbucks’ Holiday Cup Is ‘Gay'” (The Daily Caller)

“Starbucks’ Holiday Cups Spark Debate Over The Company’s Alleged ‘Gay Agenda’!” (PerezHilton)

“Starbucks cups with ‘gay agenda’ brew up controversy, boycott hashtag” (NY Daily News)

“Conservatives Attack Starbucks Holiday Cup’s ‘Gay Agenda'” (Advocate)

“Starbucks Holiday Cups Face Controversy For Being LGBTQ Friendly” (Teen Vogue)

There are more but you get the picture.

Note how the articles start with, basically, “Starbucks’ Christmas cups have a gay agenda!” and gradually move to “There’s a gay agenda controversy over Starbucks cups,” and end up, essentially, “People are boycotting Starbucks for their gay agenda coffee cups.”

Literally, Buzzfeed found a few people who thought maybe the hands on the Starbucks cup might be two women, and went with it as news. And the response to that thinly-sourced article morphed into this Holiday season’s Starbucks controversy.

Business Insider’s Kate Taylor just published an opinion piece in what is essentially a follow up to their first report that called Buzzfeed’s Starbucks story “bizarre.” They beat us to publication (this article was started last week) but correctly report: “BuzzFeed News and other publications promoted and created the theory based on little evidence.”

BuzzFeed News published an article saying the cups could be “totally gay” based on a handful of tweets and an inclusive ad campaign. This article was aggregated by several other news publications, which created enough of a narrative that backlash finally emerged.

However, there was no outrage until it was manufactured by the media.

Now, to be clear, NCRM occasionally will use people’s responses on Twitter to help readers see what’s happening in real time, or what experts are saying about an important story. Last Thursday night, for example, when President Trump went after Senator Franken, despite numerous allegations against Trump by at least 16 women, we focused our story on the anger and outrage people were feeling on social media, and how they were sharing quotes from his “Access Hollywood” tape because that was news that was happening. We didn’t look for a controversy that wasn’t there and we didn’t try to create one.

Buzzfeed does some excellent reporting. This was not excellent reporting. 

To comment on this article and other NCRM content, visit our Facebook page.

Image via NIS/Twitter

If you find NCRM valuable, would you please consider making a donation to support our independent journalism?

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Will Trump Testify at Trial? ‘Absolutely’ Is Now a ‘No Decision’ Yet

Published

on

The State of New York’s prosecution of Donald Trump is nearing it end, as Judge Juan Merchan announced late Thursday afternoon final arguments could begin on Tuesday. But one question remains: Will the ex-president who is facing 34 felony charges in the election interference, falsification of business records, and hush money cover-up case, testify in his defense?

Just over one month ago Trump was asked that question. He quickly responded, “Yeah I would testify, absolutely.”

Trump appeared resolved.

READ MORE: Ex-Florida GOP Chair’s Efforts to Recruit 3-Way Partners for Anti-LGBTQ Wife Revealed: Report

“I’m testifying. I tell the truth. I mean, all I can do is tell the truth. And the truth is that there is no case,” he said, as NBC News reported.

NBC added last week that Trump “told Newsmax two weeks ago that he would testify ‘if necessary,’ and on Tuesday he said in an interview with Spectrum News 1 Wisconsin that he would ‘probably’ take the stand, adding that he ‘would like to.'”

But when Judge Merchan asked Todd Blanche, Trump’s attorney, on Thursday, the answer was very different.

“That’s another decision that we need to think through,” he said, according to the Associated Press.

But Politico’s Erica Orden reported, “Blanche says Trump hasn’t made a final decision about whether to testify.”

Last week, as the question of Trump’s testifying loomed large, U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) insisted he would not.

“It’s over. Donald Trump has a right to not testify. Yet he PROMISED he would. Now it’s clear he won’t. The jury can’t consider this. But you can. He is chickenshit and you should conclude he’s guilty as hell.”

On Wednesday, attorney George Conway addressed the topic, saying, “If he doesn’t testify, it’s because he’s scared.”

He also said, “in a million years, I would never tell him to testify. I would tell him not to testify.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump Wails His Judge Was Appointed by ‘Democrat Politicians’ – That’s False

 

Continue Reading

News

Ex-Florida GOP Chair’s Efforts to Recruit 3-Way Partners for Anti-LGBTQ Wife Revealed: Report

Published

on

A stunning police report reveals how Christian Ziegler, the now-ousted Florida Republican Party chair, would head out to bars to scope out and recruit women as possible three-way sex partners for himself and his stridently anti-LGBTQ wife, Moms for Liberty co-founder Bridget Ziegler.

The disgraced Florida power couple’s ménage à trois sex scandal made national headlines after an accusation of rape against Christian Ziegler came from one of their three-way sexual partners, an allegation he denied. After an investigation no charges were filed.

Christian Ziegler lost his high-paying job as the Florida GOP chairman, but his wife Bridget has refused to resign from her elected position on a school board, as well as from her position on the state board that now oversees the Walt Disney World special district. Bridget Ziegler, who is seen as an architect of Governor Ron DeSantis’ “Don’t Say Gay” law, reportedly is best friends with Florida First Lady Casey DeSantis, and was appointed to the special district role by the Florida GOP governor.

The Sarasota Police Dept. report, according to the Florida Trident, “recounts how Christian Ziegler went ‘on the prowl’ in bars for women to bring home to Bridget, a Sarasota County School Board member who has backed a number of anti-LGBTQ measures at both the state and local level, for threesome encounters. While at the bars, Christian would surreptitiously photograph prospective women and text the photos to Bridget for approval, according to the report.”

READ MORE: ‘Mouths of Sauron’: Critics Blast ‘Mobster Tactic’ of Trump Surrogates ‘Violating’ Gag Order

Some of the details are salacious.

“There were numerous text messages between Bridget and Christian where they are on the prowl for a female and Bridget is directing him to numerous different bars in search of a female that they are both interested in,” the report reads, according to The Trident. “During these conversations Christian is secretly taking photographs of women in the bars and sending them to Bridget asking her if she wants this one or that one. Bridget is telling him to pretend to take pictures of his beer, so they don’t see him taking pictures of them. She tells him ‘Don’t come home until your dick is wet.’”

The Zieglers are in court trying to block the release of the text messages and other media, alleging in a lawsuit against the Sarasota Police Dept. and the State Attorney’s Office that “release of those records would cause ‘great humiliation and harm to their individual reputations’ if released and therefore should be destroyed.”

“The suit specifically addresses the contents of Christian Ziegler’s cell phone, his social media accounts, web browsing history, and the video he made of the sexual encounter with the alleged rape victim,” the Trident reports.

Meanwhile, despite her own actions and after months of laying low, Bridget Ziegler is back on her anti-LGBTQ crusade.

“At last week’s school board meeting, Ziegler introduced a highly contentious resolution to ignore protections for LGBTQ students afforded by a new federal Title IX rule,” the Trident also reports. “The resolution, which followed a DeSantis legal challenge to Title IX at the state level, claims the new rule would cause ‘disastrous impacts to girls and women’s safety in restrooms, locker rooms, and sports.’ It passed by a 4-1 vote despite the fact it could lead to a federal investigation, expensive litigation, and the loss to the school district of roughly $50 million in federal funds.”

READ MORE: Trump Appears to Violate Gag Order After Judge Threatened ‘Incarceration’

 

Continue Reading

News

Trump Appears to Violate Gag Order After Judge Threatened ‘Incarceration’

Published

on

Despite New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan explicitly warning Donald Trump last week that any future violations of his gag order could result in jail time, the ex-president appears to have done so directly on Thursday.

“A lead person from the DOJ is running the trial,” Trump claimed, obviously referring to prosecutor Matthew Colangelo, as Law & Crime reports.

“So Biden’s office is running this trial. This trial is a scam and it’s a sham and it shouldn’t happen,” Trump told reporters outside the courtroom.

Judge Merchan’s gag order specifically prohibits trump from attacking anyone in District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office, except for the D.A. himself.

“Colangelo, a lead prosecutor in the case, was criticized one day earlier by Trump ally Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, largely raising the same complaints that Trump repeated outside of court,” Law & Crime noted.

READ MORE: ‘Ready to Start Another Insurrection’: Gaetz Support for Trump Echoes Proud Boys Order

The gag order explicitly states Trump is “directed to refrain from”:

“Making or directing others to make public statements about known or reasonably foreseeable witnesses concerning their potential participation in the investigation or in this criminal proceeding; Making or directing others to make public statements” about attorneys “in the case other than the District Attorney,” “members of the court’s staff and the District Attorney’s staff, or the family members of any counsel or staff member” or “any prospective juror or any juror in this criminal proceeding.”

Ten days ago Merchan wrote in his order: “Defendant is hereby put on notice that if appropriate and warranted, future violations of its lawful orders will be punishable by incarceration.”

Watch below or at this link.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.