Tall Latte of Disinformation: Starbucks Roasted Across Social Media Over Perceived Stance on Israel/Hamas Conflict

Following the start of the Israel-Hamas war in October last year, Starbucks found itself in the odd position of being a target of both pro-Israel and pro-Palestine supporters across social media. The result was a firestorm of dis/misinformation and conspiracy theories about the global barista, leading to significant reputational damage, violent protests, and persistent financial losses over the past 4 months. 

As the Israel-Hamas conflict kicked off in early October, Workers United - a union that represents a portion of Starbucks' baristas - took to X to express solidarity with Palestine¹. 

The post was quickly deleted, but calls from some pro-Israel advocates and US politicians to boycott Starbucks erupted² with many suggesting the union represented Starbucks' stance on the war.

Starbucks responded with a public statement, clarifying that Workers United does not speak for the company and subsequently filed a civil lawsuit against the union over the controversial post³. This action in turn, sparked calls by pro-Palestinian groups to boycott Starbucks too.

Since then, pro-Israel, pro-Palestine, and other groups have used mainstream and unmoderated social media to spread disinformation and conspiracies about the company and the former leadership's position on the conflict. 

• On X, a Jewish-affiliated group noted that, "Starbucks has blood on its hands," and that, "as Jews, we call on all people to boycott such companies that have the blood of innocent people on their hands."⁴

On Gab, pro-Palestine users alleged Starbucks and its CEO are Jewish and therefore support Israel⁵. We judge this was a reference to the company's former CEO, Howard Schultz. 

• The notion that Starbucks and Mr. Schultz support Israel and their military is not new.  This conspiracy theory dates back to at least 2014⁶  and is so pervasive that the company has even publicly stated that it does not support, "any government or military operations anywhere."⁷ Which illustrates how pervasive such narratives can be across platforms with little to no moderation.

Far-right users on unmoderated social media have further leveraged this narrative to also criticize Starbucks' position on issues like abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, and other, more conspiratorial topics surrounding minorities, Democratic lawmakers, and Satanism.⁸⁹

Users on two of these platforms - Gab and VKontakte - went so far as reposting an article penned by the Iranian state-owned news outlet PressTV claiming, "the US and other Western allies of the Tel Aviv regime remain deeply complicit in the genocide of Palestinians," ¹⁰¹¹ along with an image that furthers the narrative that Starbucks, McDonalds, and other well-known Western companies support Israel.

Starbucks' facilities have become easy targets for pro-Palestinian to stage protests at or retaliate against the barista's perceived support for Israel. 

• There have been at least 10 protests in the US since the beginning of the conflict against Starbucks facilities, three of which were considered violent or required intervention by law enforcement, according to the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project.¹²
  
• Acts of violence against US locations were among the most targeted and included graffiti with hateful and antisemitic messages such as, “stop killing children...free Palestine...stop genocide,” and a swastika alongside a Star of David.¹³
  
• Since early October 2023, the hashtag "#boycottstarbucks" remains one of the top trending hashtags across alternative and some moderated social media outlets, according to Pyrra's AI, highlighting the longevity and ability for disinformation to spread and influence audiences across the social media ecosystem.

Calls for boycotts, physical attacks against Starbucks' locations, and misperceptions about the company’s beanery's stance on the Israel/Hamas conflict have contributed to lagging earnings from late 2023 into early 2024, according to recent statements by Starbucks current CEO Laxman Narasimhan.¹⁴

• Starbucks seniors have also noted that earnings from 2024’s first quarter were lower than expected, causing the company to reassess the yearly outlook.¹⁵

Starbucks is no stranger to controversy and its current CEO has made a public statement blaming misinformation for the negative and often violent reactions to who the barista allegedly supports in the conflict. This latest example illustrates how quickly language can be weaponized and result in negative real-world implications for global companies and markets. 

Given Starbucks’ stance on several hot button issues, this will unlikely be the last instance that negative sentiment festers on unmoderated social media towards the company before eventually spilling into physical violence. Developing collection strategies to monitor these fringe mediums could help Starbucks in mitigating potential future threats to its employees and facilities.