Starbucks Korea issued a formal apology after a marketing phrase referencing the Gwangju “Tank Day” sparked widespread public outrage [1, 2].
The incident is significant because it touches upon the 5.18 Gwangju Democratization Movement, a cornerstone of South Korean democratic history. By referencing this period and the family of activist Park Jong-cheol, the company faced accusations of trivializing historical trauma and causing deep emotional distress to victims' families [1, 2].
Jeon Sang-jin, the chief executive of Shinsegae Group, apologized for the distress caused to the families of those who died, Gwangju citizens, and the public [1, 2]. He said that the company deeply apologizes for causing great pain and concern through the inappropriate marketing [1, 2].
Following the backlash, Starbucks Korea conducted an internal investigation to determine how the phrase was approved. Jeon said that based on the results of the investigation so far, the company has not found clear evidence that employees or executives planned the marketing with intentional malice [1, 2].
The controversy also triggered a wave of internal reactions. Employees used the company’s internal messenger platform to share their perspectives and respond to the public outcry [1]. These internal discussions highlighted the tension within the corporate culture as staff grappled with the fallout of the campaign [1].
Despite the lack of evidence regarding intent, the company continues to face criticism for the lack of sensitivity in its review process. The reference to “Tank Day” was deemed highly inappropriate given the violent suppression of the 1980 protests in Gwangju [1, 2].
“The company has not found clear evidence that employees or executives planned the marketing with intentional malice”
This incident underscores the high stakes of corporate social responsibility in South Korea, where historical memory and political sensitivity are deeply intertwined. For a global brand like Starbucks, the failure to vet marketing materials against local historical traumas can lead to severe reputational damage and internal instability, regardless of whether the offense was intentional or a result of negligence.
