Dear Supermarket CEO:
In September 1999, Wirthlin Worldwide conducted a national survey of Americans ages 18 and over. Two questions were asked on behalf of Morality in Media concerning the display of magazines at supermarket checkout counters. The two questions, along with overall results, are as follows:
1. In many supermarket checkout counters, magazines such as Cosmopolitan, Mademoiselle and Glamour display lurid and sexually provocative headlines on their magazine covers, such as SEX TRICKS HE'S NEVER SEEN BEFORE - THE OUTRAGEOUS ROCK TECHNIQUE, and ORGASM DO'S AND DONT'S. In your opinion, do you think these headlines are appropriate or inappropriate?Some supermarket chains have responded to complaints by saying, in so many words, as follows:
22% Appropriate 73% Inappropriate 5% Don't Know/Refused2. Some people have recommended a policy of covering up the headlines on these types of magazines or of not displaying these magazines at checkout counters. Do you favor or oppose such a policy?
60% Favor 35% Oppose 5% Don't Know/RefusedAmong women who, presumably, are the intended audience for these publications, the results were:
14% Appropriate 64% Favor 81% Inappropriate 30% OpposeThe results show that a large majority of the American people think the display at supermarket checkouts of lurid magazine covers is "inappropriate" and, by an almost 2 to 1 majority, would support your decision to either cover the offensive headlines or display the magazines elsewhere.
"Removing particular magazines such as... would infringe upon the rights of consumers who do not share your views on this matter and would place us in the position of making moral judgements for our customers."In the first place, we do not ask that these magazines be removed from the store or checkout counters. We ask only that if stores display these magazines at checkouts, they cover up the raunchy sex headlines so that children are not exposed to them.
Secondly, there is no "right" to purchase any particular publication at your stores. The First Amendment requires only that government not restrict speech. Your stores are free to impose their own limits. I would add that tens-of-millions of Americans cannot buy their favorite magazines at your checkouts, because your purchasing department has made a judgment not to carry them.
Thirdly, we are not asking you to make "moral judgements for your customers." We are asking you to make your own moral or business judgement about whether it is "appropriate" or good for the communities you serve to expose children to prurient sex headlines intended for morally challenged adults.
When I pick up the daily newspapers at a local variety store, I am impressed by the wide selection of decent and helpful magazines on display. But when I buy groceries, I am typically confronted at checkouts with a prominent and unobstructed display of skin, titillation, and prurience.
Undoubtedly, there is a market for such trash, but the display at checkouts of magazine covers with bold prurient headlines, where even children can see them every day, is not what the large majority of your customers want to see.
Sincerely,
Robert Peters
President
P.S. We wanted to include the phrase "where even children can see them every day" in the first survey question, but Wirthlin felt this would unfairly prejudice the results in favor of our view. If you would like a copy of the Wirthlin survey results and analysis, I would be happy to provide it.