No Posted Policy for Reading Magazines at Target

This is one of the rare times when I disagree with most of the
responses. I've seen plenty of people flipping through magazines at
the store and have done so myself. There is nothing wrong with doing
so.

There is also no posted policy that I can't drop my pants and pee all
over the floor but common sense tells me it's wrong.

I hope these same people poo-pooing the OP for reading a magazine in
Target aren't the same people who sit around Barnes and Noble reading
books and magazines (especially in the Starbucks food/drink
department) without buying them. Or the people who bring there kids
to the kid section of book stores to sit for hours reading books
together and playing with the picture/activity books.

I believe there is NO posted policy about opening a package of
Ding-Dongs or Twinkies and trying a few before considering buying them
too! Those scoundrels!

1) I agree with many below - this isn't a "Target policy," but rather
something that should be common sense. I don't think it really would
be worth it for Target to post a sign, because 99% of people would
ignore it anyhow, and still balk if an employee called them out, even
with the "policy" posted in plain sight.

2) After reading through all the comparisons and comments about theft
below, I have some thoughts. The big thing that struck me is that
people seem to have different opinions as far as "how much reading is
too much" prior to paying for the magazine.

To me, if you flip through it, maybe peruse the table of contents and
a few pages to get a feel, you're fine. That's similar (as some said)
to reading the instructions on a box or briefly trying on a garment.

However, if you stand there for more than 5 minutes, obviously reading
and absorbing the material, then leave without paying, you now have
that information in your brain, but did not pay for it. Which, to me,
is kind of stealing.

The other thing here is that the manager / employee had no way of
knowing if the OP was going to pay for the magazine in the end, or was
just going to stand there all night reading and leave without buying a
single thing.

If the manager was outright rude, then the complaint should focus on
that. What he told you, however, was nothing that should have come as
a surprise, or is worthy of a complaint.

I was in Walmart this morning and wanted to pick up a copy of the
recent running magazine. When I got home and opened it up, I started
reading a very interesting article. I never got to finish reading the
article. Apparently, someone decided to rip another article out of
the magazine, which was on the other side of what I was reading. I
took it back and exchanged it for another complete magazine. I was
surprised that I was able to. This is why stores don't like you
reading magazines that you haven't paid for yet. BTW, I was very nice
when I went to return it, mostly cause I wasn't expecting them to.

In my retail days, we would find ripped up magazines in the rack,
people who look thru have to bend the pages to turn them instead of
gently rolling the page etc. Maybe all mags should have a plastic wrap
on them. But then the magazine ppl would be harrassed for not "going
green".

Another situation, ppl opening up packages of socks, underwear,
tshirts to check out size. Then deciding they don't want an open one
and buy a brand new pack or just leaving the opened one. They have an
easy open tab in the back, no need to rip the damn thing.Stores have
to claim a loss on so many perfectly fine items b/c people have to
destroy stuff they have no intention on buying.

A couple months ago while shopping for a dirt devil, some lady had
about 3 boxes of these opened and going thru the contents then left
leaving all of it in shambles.

hmmm, I don't understand.... the other day i was at K-Mart. I took a
crap in the middle of the floor near electronics. The told me not to
do that and that i must leave at once, i never saw a sign that said
not to do that. Im puzzled....;)



my point, like many other posters is, just because there is no
explicit direction not to do something doesnt mean it ok to do.

I hate getting magazines from the store that have been paged
thru...coupons and sometimes pages are missing, and yes sometimes the
pages have smudges on them.
Personally I think it would be nice if the publishers put a little
sticker on the outside that seals the pages - not that this would stop
people from pre-reading and putting them back but it may detere them
and make them think a bit more.

I mean if you go by that mindset... You can just walk into Target and
start punching employees. There's no sign that says "Don't punch the
staff" right?

Obviously, you can't do that.


Likewise... Stores dislike it when people read the magazines and then
don't buy them

1) If you were reading the magazine with no intent to buy it, then you
were stealing. You might not like being told that, but... *shrug*

2) Reading a magazine and then putting it back often ends up damaging
the product. Then it means the company might not be able to sell
it... So no only is the "non-buying-reader" is now costing the
company money.


Sure, one might say "but it's only a few dollars"... Depends on the
magazine, some are more expensive. And if many people do it, it means
the cost to the store adds up. Sure, they might not be able to raise
the price on the periodicals to cover the eventual loss, but ...
prices on other products can rise in the long run.



Basically... if you really really really need to read a magazine that
you do not intend to buy... go to a public library. There you can do
it as much as you want, and it's legal.

Personally, I am with Target. It is not your product, you have not
purchased it, so they can ask you not to use the product until it is
purchased. How long did you stand there and read the article? Maybe he
thought that was all you were going to do...read and then put it back
on the shelf and not purchase it.

When I buy a magazine, I read the cover and look at the table of
contents, and flip through it really quick. Usually it takes me a
minute to decide whether I want to purchase it or not. I don't read an
entire article, however.

Anyhow, if he was in fact rude to you, then I think he shouldn't have
been. A simple, "please don't read the magazines until you purchase
them," would have worked out well.

I don't understand people at Barnes and Noble or BAM who sit in the
back and read the magazines. It's not hard to decide whether or not to
purchase it. So, sitting back there and reading full articles is
essentially stealing the product. Most of the people don't buy the
magazines, they just sit back there and read them, then leave them in
stacks on the benches.

I actually never knew this was 'wrong' (reading in a store) until
recently. I vividly recall being a teenager and leafing through game
magazines to find codes I wanted for a particular game and then
writing down said codes on a small notebook or on my hand so I didn't
need to spend $5+ for one or two codes. Seemed very...un-economical.
Or, if I saw an article I really wanted to keep in an expensive
magazine, I would go take it to the copy machine a few aisles down
(yeah, this grocery store had a copier) and pay a few cents for black
and white copies.

Honestly, if stores cared enough about people reading and then not
buying their magazines, they'd keep said reading material behind the
counter. I mean, not even the plastic bags some magazines come in
help, because I've seen plenty of copies of books like Shonen Jump
wrapped up in plastic that got torn open.

And really, if anyone who was not an employee accosted me for reading
in a store, I would promptly give them a verbal lashing and introduce
them to my middle finger. Why? Because it's none of their business and
I don't respond well to vigilante justice crap. If an employee makes
the same request (without a horrible attitude), then I will listen.

Unless the little man of which you speak was an employee who copped an
attitude, I don't know if corporate can really do anything. I think it
might be discrimination if they banned all little people from their
stores. A sign likely would not help because...well...anyone who knows
anything about customer service knows people in general do not read
signs. Even when they are big and sport big bright letters with
blinking neon lights, there's always a handful of special snowflakes
who still ignore signs that present an inconvenience to them.

Maybe corporate should keep their mags in a locked see-through display
case, like how video games are kept. People can point to the ones they
want and an employee can retrieve them.

IMO, a store cannot possibly post a sign to cover every conceivable
situation that a customer could come up with.

It is common sense (or should it be common courtesy?) to not use the
product in the store without buying it first. That applies to
magazines, too.

Honestly, so few people probably stand at the periodicals and just
READ without buying anything in the store, I don't see how it's worth
it to antagonize a shopper that way. I just can't imagine it's that
big of a problem.

There is no need for a sign - this is common sense.

When you go to buy a magazine, and it has been used already, that is
unfair.

. . . they keep porn magazines wrapped in plastic - don't want
customers "reading" them without paying first!

You honestly expect a store to post on every product that you are not
allowed to take it, or use it without paying?

"Sorry little man with a bad attitude, I did grab one diaper out of
that pack of 30 to use on my baby before we left the store, but there
was no sign stating I had to pay for it. It was just one. I didn't
need to use the whole pack. You expect me to pay for it?"

It just seems too much like common knowledge to me. It's a store. They
have things there to SELL.

I feel that looking at the table of contents, or thumbing through some
pictures would be comaprable to reading the
specs/ingredients/instructions on any other item before purchasing.

But even you admit you read an entire article, which could have been
many pages for all we know. Thats consumption pure and simple.

Obviously you were there long enough that an employee had to remind
you that it's not fair to consume something that you haven't paid for.

I hate it at barnes and nobles where the latte drinking trendy
progressives thumb through every book making it impossible to give
most books as a gift due to the pages and book sleeve being bent or
soiled.

Magazines and books at my grocery store are pay on scan. The vendor
drops them off, stocks them and gets paid on what they sell. They
take the hit on damages, out of dates, and stolen or soiled
merchandised. The latter is generally found in the bathrooms.


With pay on scan the store incurres no loss. So I really do not see
why it is such a big deal, unless the person is there for hours on end
causing a problem


Good Day

I have always found it odd that people go to book stores to read.
They just sit around and read. I have always found it odd that book
stores allow such a thing. They aren't making money off these people
and some of them are really in the way of paying customers.

Regardless of my feelings, this is something that has come to be
accepted (even encouraged) as an industry. If Target doesn't want to
be a part of it then that is fine but they need to put up a sign
stating so since it is so widely accepted elsewhere.

When I was younger, I got chastised by an employee (not Target) for
reading a magaine. I wasn't even really reading it, just leafing
through the pages to see if I wanted to buy it. However, I had done
that with a few other magazines, and the guy decided I was using the
rack as the library and told me so.

Too bad, because I left the store shortly after and made my purchases
elsewhere.

I agree the magazine rack at Target shouldn't be used as the library,
but without stationing an employee there 24/7, how does a store
enforce this? And's who's to say the OP wasn't going to purchase the
magazine? Maybe he'd find the article interesting enough to purchase.

I think this is one of the gray-area issues, and, like Venice, I'm
curious how Target will respond to this.

eduardo j.,

A quick scan of the Table of Contents and maybe leafing through the
pages but not reading. That my friend is for the library or the barber
shop.

Stop back when you hear back.

BillR.

I though it was common sense not to read the magazines in the store
before purchasing them, although everyone does it (including me). If
you think about it theft is taking something without paying. You are
essentially taking something without paying. Although it is in
writing, you have not paid for the magazine yet, therefore it is
theft.

Some stores I have been to have the magazines in plastic bags with a
sign that says DO NOT OPEN MAGAZINE bags, so if there is a major
problem at this location, they should adopt such a plan/ policy.

I think that it is totally fair to look through a magazine to see if
it interests you before you purchase it... It would take a long time
to read the whole thing, and if you are just checking out an article
without damaging it, then it should be OK.

And kudos to you for speaking up and calling him out on being rude. I
would choose a different location in the future, or a different store
altogether.

One would think that with all the product placement in magazines, that
stores would be open to you reading them. You are effectively reading
their advertisements. I dont believe the store manager was justified
in what he did, but like other posters said, perhaps this is a
location specific issue.

n/t

Those magazines/newspapers are a person's livelihood. But I don't
think it's a problem at newsstands. Most people are to busy to stand
around reading a newspaper. They just grab, pay and leave.