Claim: In some CVS stores, of all the hair care items vended there, only those marketed to African-Americans were tagged with anti-theft devices.
Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2006]
This is a follow up to the e-mail which I sent on Friday. On today, I went to my neighborhood CVS store to personally see for myself if the news reports of this national drug store profiling African-Americans by placing anti-theft devices on only Black hair care products were valid. After arriving at this store, I looked at both expensive and none expensive White hair products and I found NO anti-theft devices. I then looked on the boxes of both expensive and not expensive Black hair care products. What I found was shocking! ONLY Black hair care products had anti-theft devices on them. I immediately went to the store management and asked why did only the Black hair products have these devices? The store manager looked like a ‘deer caught in the headlights of an approaching car.’ He said White hair products also had the anti-theft devices. I asked him to walk please walk to the aisle with me and show me the White hair care products which had these anti-theft devices and he refused escort me to the aisle and show me and he was not able to tell me of any White hair care products which had the anti-theft devices on them! I immediately turned in my CVS cards and respectfully told this manger I would NEVER shop in this store and that I would inform all of my family, friends and Internet friends of this. I am now keeping my promise to inform each of you of this dirty, hidden, secret ploy of this national drug store CVS. I hope each of you inform your friends, family and Internet contacts and stay clear of this national store.
Origins: In early May 2006, the above-quoted denunciation of racial profiling by nationwide chain of CVS drug stores began circulating on the Internet. According to news segments we found, the charge appeared to have a basis of truth to it: in some CVS stores television news reporters visited, only hair care products meant for African-American consumers were security-tagged; the other kinds of similar products available on those stores’ shelves bore no such
As reported by News Channel 7 in Spartanburg, South Carolina: “We bought hair care products from the CVS/pharmacy store in Boiling Springs. The hair relaxers for African American women have security tags. Similar, more expensive hair straighteners for Caucasian women did not” and “We bought these boxes of ‘Just Five’ hair color from the same shelf at the CVS store on Chesnee Highway in Spartanburg. The two for African American women have security tags. The one for Caucasian women, no tag.”
However, the same segment pointed out this practice had not been the case in every CVS store reporters visited: “That’s two out of three CVS stores in Spartanburg and one out of eleven CVS stores in Greenville. The other CVS stores tagged hair products for both whites and blacks, or none of them.”
A similar piece aired on
When called upon by the reporters from each of these news agencies to answer to their findings, CVS explained they place security tags on products that are shoplifted the most often. However, a
The South Carolina NAACP stated that they planned to ask CVS to change the way it tags its hair products.
In recent years several large chain retailers have been the targets of lawsuits charging them with unfairly treating minority customers as thieves, with plaintiffs claiming that the stores engaged in racial profiling and accused minority customers of shoplifting despite a lack of evidence that any thefts had occurred.
In a 2005 lawsuit, Dillard’s department store was charged with wrongly detaining black customers for shoplifting in Arkansas, Tennessee, and Florida. The eight plaintiffs said they were interrogated and accused by Dillard’s employees or security personnel of stealing
Also in 2005, ten shoppers filed suit against
A lawsuit filed in 2003 claimed that of the approximately 1,600 individuals apprehended on suspicion of shoplifting at a Macy’s department store in
Theft of retail goods is a problem of almost unimaginable proportions. In 2001, the National Retail Federation estimated shoplifting cost retailers
Drug stores are particularly prone to “shrinkage” (the retail industry’s term for merchandise theft) because the goods sold in such establishments are generally small and easily pocketed. Some retailers, such as CVS, combat the lightfingered with Electronic Article Surveillance technology, an anti-shoplifting system that involves attaching electronically-detectable tags to merchandise. It is these tags that are the subject of the current rumor about hair care products intended for African-Americans.
While I would have liked to have included statements from CVS about its product-tagging practices in general and this rumor in particular, trying to obtain a response from them proved fruitless. I
Barbara “unanswered” Mikkelson
Last updated: 22 June 2014
Barrett, Steve. “Channel 9 News.” 9 WFTV [Orlando, FL] 30 April 2006. Chandler, Michele. “Black Teen Files Suit Against Safeway Over Shoplifting Accusations.” San Jose Mercury News. 10 March 2005. Daugherty, Scott. “Shoplifters Use Aluminum to Foil Security.” The [Annapolis] Capital. 14 May 2005 (p. A1). Hornaday, Bill. “Dillard’s Accused of Picking on Blacks.” Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. 21 October 2005. Kong, Deborah. “Retailers Fight Wave of Racial Profiling Cases.” [Dubuque] Telegraph Herald. 9 June 2003 (p. D5). Lewis, Diane. “Customers Sue Wal-Mart Over Alleged Bias.” The Boston Globe. 13 July 2005 (p. D4). Milton, Pat. “Macy’s Agrees to Enforce Policy Against Racial Profiling in Shoplifting.” The Associated Press. 14 January 2005. Quraishi, Ash-Har. “5 at Ten.” 5 KCTV [Kansas City, MO] 1 March 2006. Sullivan, Heather. “News Channel 7: CVS Security Tags.” 7 WSPA [Spartanburg, SC] 27 April 2006. Sullivan, Heather. “News Channel 7: CVS Security Tags.” 7 WSPA [Spartanburg, SC] 28 April 2006. Tucker, Neely. “Two Allege Bias at Store in Georgetown.” The Washington Post. 12 December 2002 (p. B3). The Birmingham Times. “Racial Discrimination at Macy’s Nationwide.” 25 June 2003 (p. A7). Progressive Grocer. “CVS/Pharmacy Teams with Checkpoint for Chainwide EAS Installation.” 12 July 2004.
A Word to Our Loyal Readers
Support Snopes and make a difference for readers everywhere.
- David Mikkelson
- Doreen Marchionni
- David Emery
- Bond Huberman
- Jordan Liles
- Alex Kasprak
- Dan Evon
- Dan MacGuill
- Bethania Palma
- Liz Donaldson
- Vinny Green
- Ryan Miller
- Chris Reilly
- Chad Ort
- Elyssa Young
Most Snopes assignments begin when readers ask us, “Is this true?” Those tips launch our fact-checkers on sprints across a vast range of political, scientific, legal, historical, and visual information. We investigate as thoroughly and quickly as possible and relay what we learn. Then another question arrives, and the race starts again.
We do this work every day at no cost to you, but it is far from free to produce, and we cannot afford to slow down. To ensure Snopes endures — and grows to serve more readers — we need a different kind of tip: We need your financial support.
Support Snopes so we continue to pursue the facts — for you and anyone searching for answers.