Starbucks Korea Closes All Stores for History Lessons Following Controversial Promotion
In a significant response to public backlash, Starbucks Korea has announced the simultaneous closure of all its stores to conduct mandatory history lessons for employees. This measure follows a promotional campaign that inappropriately coincided with the anniversary of the Gwangju Uprising, a pro-democracy massacre that deeply resonates within South Korean society.
On June 22, at 3 PM, over 2,000 Starbucks locations will temporarily shutter, allowing staff to participate in recorded lectures focused on modern Korean history and “social sensitivity” training. This initiative is expected to cost the company an estimated 2.1 billion won (approximately $1.4 million) in lost sales, as reported by IGAWorks.
The decision comes on the heels of significant public relations turmoil triggered when Starbucks Korea promoted its “Tank” tumbler series on May 18, the anniversary of the 1980 Gwangju massacre. The campaign ignited widespread outrage, leading to customer boycotts, incidents of vandalism, and the cessation of ties between government ministries and the coffee giant.
Chung Yong-jin, the billionaire chair of the Shinsegae Group, which operates Starbucks Korea under license from its U.S. parent, will join the training on June 24, along with other executives. The bespoke curriculum will cover pivotal events in contemporary Korean history and the importance of addressing historical and social sensitivities in marketing strategies.
Shinsegae has positioned the shutdown as a demonstration of its commitment to acknowledging the gravity of the incident and preventing future controversies. Notably, only airport outlets will remain open during this period.
Data indicates that payment volumes at Starbucks experienced a sharp decline of 26% in the week following the controversial promotion, though there has been a modest recovery of 12.8% in early June. Nevertheless, total sales remain roughly 25% lower than pre-incident levels.
The Gwangju Uprising is a painful chapter in South Korea’s history, marked by ten days of violence as paratroopers attempted to suppress pro-democracy protests against the military regime of Chun Doo-hwan. Reports suggest that hundreds were killed during these protests, a fact that has left an indelible mark on the nation’s collective memory.
In the promotional material, Starbucks branded May 18 as “Tank Day” and included the slogan “thwack on the desk,” referencing a notorious police explanation following the torture and death of student activist Park Jong-chul in 1987. The phrase mistakenly invoked historical trauma and triggered further outrage. According to Shinsegae, managers involved in the campaign had relied on suggestions from an AI tool, and many had not reviewed crucial emails containing the marketing materials.
Although the company retracted the campaign within hours and swiftly fired the chief executive, the damage was already significant. Starbucks has since expressed deep remorse over the incident, with Chung issuing a public apology during a televised conference, bowing three times to emphasize his regret.
In a bid to address the concerns of the victims’ families, Starbucks’ headquarters in Seattle also sent a written apology to the May 18 Foundation, which advocates for Gwangju victims.
An internal investigation revealed no evidence of intentional wrongdoing, but a police inquiry remains ongoing, with both Chung and the former CEO registered as criminal suspects.
The controversy underscores the divergent attitudes in South Korea regarding the Gwangju Uprising, a subject that remains a deeply divisive issue. Far-right groups persist in perpetuating discredited narratives that frame the protesters as North Korean sympathizers—a characterization that the country’s supreme court recently ruled as false and defamatory.
As Starbucks takes steps to amend its public image and corporate practices, the incident serves as a stark reminder of the importance of cultural sensitivity in marketing strategies and corporate responsibility in addressing historical wounds.
