Brick vs. Click: E-Commerce vs. Physical Retail Stores

Introduction: The Retail Crisis and the Rise of E-Commerce

From rural strip malls to Manhattan's avenues, it has been a disastrous few years for retail. There were nine retail bankruptcies in 2017 alone — as many as in all of 2016. J.C. Penney, RadioShack, Macy's, and Sears each announced more than 100 store closures. Sports Authority liquidated, and Payless filed for bankruptcy. Several apparel companies' stocks hit multi-year lows, including Lululemon, Urban Outfitters, and American Eagle, and Ralph Lauren announced the closure of its flagship Polo store on Fifth Avenue — one of several brands to abandon that iconic thoroughfare.

A deep recession might explain an extinction-level event for large retailers. But U.S. GDP had been growing for eight straight years, gas prices were low, unemployment was under 5 percent, and the preceding 18 months had been quietly excellent for wage growth, particularly for middle- and lower-income Americans. The U.S. economy had not hindered consumerism; rather, the method and preferences of consumerism had simply changed. E-commerce emerged as one of the principal methods of shopping, and many began blaming it for the demise of traditional physical retail outlets. This paper analyzes the validity of these claims by deconstructing three editorials, each of which posits the notion that the physical retail industry is losing market share to e-commerce.

Prior to analyzing the specifics of these editorials, it helps to contextualize them within the general sentiment surrounding the relationship between e-commerce and physical retail. Proponents of e-commerce believe that with the growth of online shopping, American consumers have discovered the simplicity and comfort of buying goods online, and as a result have forgone conventional brick-and-mortar retail outlets. Many believe e-commerce giants such as Amazon have met the consumer's every wish — in terms of what is delivered (such as groceries) and how it is delivered (via free, fast shipping). Consequently, there has been significant opposition to the rise of e-commerce from champions of physical retail. Individuals in support of local retailers have pledged to boycott online shopping to demonstrate their commitment to local, physical outlets. The tension between these partisans is readily evident in the three editorials examined below.

Koss's LA Times Editorial: A Gothic Narrative of Amazon's Destruction

In the first of these editorials — an LA Times opinion piece from June 4, 2017, entitled "Amazon.com is a 21st century deal with the devil" — Amy Koss argues that Amazon is malicious because it has ruined malls and driven booksellers and other retailers out of business. Moreover, she believes it has assumed nearly total control over people's shopping habits via "Big Data," claiming that Amazon sees and knows all, and anticipates every consumer's next move. Koss's focus on Amazon is extremely important to both the overall conviction of her article and the broader notion that e-commerce is displacing shopping in physical locations. Amazon is emblematic of the perceived negative effect e-commerce is having on brick-and-mortar stores: it sells virtually everything anyone would want, has become wildly profitable, and is able to offer prices that many traditional physical retailers simply cannot match. An important implicit premise of Koss's editorial, therefore, is that everything she details about Amazon's effect on physical retail represents the negative effects that e-commerce — Amazon's business specialty — has on brick-and-mortar locations.

One of the most distinguishing features of Koss's editorial is that it functions as a narrative. The author is herself a character, and the most salient aspects of her article tell a story that explicitly blames the impending demise of retail stores on e-commerce, and on Amazon in particular. The personal touch is at times distracting, and there are moments when Koss's piece shifts toward standard journalism, referring to events and aspects of retail's decline in the third person. What is missing from the article — and what detracts from its overall conviction — is the non-partisan approach of journalism. The author is decidedly one-sided in her recounting of encounters with forces she believes signal the demise of retail. A more neutral approach would have appealed to a broader readership. As the editorial reads, she is clearly appealing to those who already share her opinion, making no attempt to persuade those with alternative views on the issue.

Koss couches her narrative by visiting the mall and speaking with booksellers, using their experiences to support her own. She provides background information along the way to make her points. The argument is not so much proven as it is reiterated — like a theme in variations — throughout the piece. It is assumed that the reader will be sympathetic to what Koss is describing. However, her take is somewhat glib and superficial. It is too easy to describe Amazon as Satan, and a thinking person will not readily subscribe to Koss's depiction. Furthermore, Koss uses colloquialisms like "we recite the roll of the dead" when describing the long list of retailers that have expired. Her use of terms like "sinister," "hell," "lost souls," "Satan," and "the damned" indicates that she is looking to provoke a dramatic or visceral effect rather than a literal or logical one.

The tone of Koss's piece is gothic and romantic. It begins by describing a mall as a deserted ruin — like an old castle — where "lost souls" wander and where Satan has cast his pall. The evidence she presents is entirely anecdotal and witnessed firsthand. Her piece is more personal narrative than research article. She provides no hyperlinks or external sources to support her claims; she simply states her observations and her interpretation of them. For example, she describes visiting the mall, encountering closed shops, and speaking briefly with a saleswoman who explains that everything must go because her store is closing. The central metaphor is that Amazon is the Devil who has given people everything they want with just a click — at the price of dying retailers, hopeless booksellers, and a loss of shared humanity. The author does not supply much ethos; instead, she jumps to pathos and uses imagery to appeal to the reader's emotions. On a superficial level, it works — but there is more to understanding commerce in the Digital Era than what Koss is able to convey.

Still, Koss makes some attempts to utilize logos, and when she does, the article works best. In a succinct series of paragraphs, she summarizes the basic appeal of Amazon and, by extension, of e-commerce as a whole. Shoppers can find almost anything they want online, and if they do not like what they see, they can readily find an alternative. This breadth of selection is difficult to match in physical retail stores. Koss also directly addresses the immediacy with which purchases are made and customers are satisfied, as well as the pricing benefits. This use of logos reinforces the fact that even detractors of e-commerce readily acknowledge its benefits. Nonetheless, the supernatural connotations with which Koss describes the transition from physical to online shopping undermine her credibility and that of the editorial overall. Koss delivers a solid piece of creative writing loosely based on reality — a fact which ultimately hampers her editorial.

Thompson's New York Times Editorial: Policy, Jobs, and Transformation

Not everyone is entirely upset about the recent shopping transformation. Some assert a more positive approach to the new landscape of the 21st century, where not only consumers but also workers are confronting change. The New York Times editorial "As Retail Goes, So Goes the Nation" by Allan Thompson, published on April 21, 2017, addresses this change within the context of lost retail positions. Thompson directs his concern in a different direction, however: rather than critiquing e-commerce companies, he critiques public policy and advocates for change, urging the U.S. government — specifically President Donald Trump — to act. His article is therefore much more neutral than Koss's, which offers a significant advantage to the non-partisan reader trying to research the facts about e-commerce and traditional retail shopping. He acknowledges the transition from physical to online shopping and presents several viable options for making that transition more beneficial to society as a whole.

The article begins by illustrating the life of the average retail worker — how jobs are being lost and the impact e-commerce has had on retail employment. Thompson acknowledges that while technology is not inherently bad, the resulting job landscape is changing drastically, with unemployment being a particularly serious ramification. Suggested solutions — a "strong safety net" for displaced workers — include continuous health care coverage and unemployment benefits. Thompson's editorial is not a rant but rather a plea: a plea for more constructive solutions to a changing world. His editorial not only acknowledges the shift in shopping trends but also looks to capitalize on it. In this respect, it becomes clear that the overall impact of e-commerce on physical retail shopping is not necessarily noxious — rather, it is more transformative in nature, creating new opportunities and avenues for fulfilling customer expectations. This understanding is critical to grasping the dynamics between these two shopping methods, and it implies that in some ways e-commerce can actually extend benefits to the world of physical retailers.

The tone of the New York Times piece is serious and informational, though it also adopts a pessimistic undertone to convey the urgency of the situation. The editorial advocates for government assistance to keep workers afloat during the transition as they seek new employment after losing retail jobs to e-commerce. Thompson does not suggest market-based alternatives; he simply argues that government subsidies are in order. Ultimately, he contends that to ensure a smooth transition in the modified job market, the government must act — like a responsible steward — to ensure that American workers are not left chronically unemployed. The premise may be sound, but the conclusion is unlikely to appeal to all, particularly to those who do not believe that expanded government is the solution. Thompson's tone is critical to understanding this article because it illustrates that there are some options for physical retail, despite the growing ascendance of e-commerce.

Thompson deftly applies ethos, logos, and pathos throughout the article. Every claim or statement is supported by a fact, provided via hyperlinks — establishing ethos. Thompson also bolsters his credibility by supplying so many sources that the reader is left with little doubt that the piece is well-researched and full of facts that cannot easily be dismissed. Additionally, Thompson employs logos by indicating that e-commerce will not put people out of work indefinitely — new jobs will always emerge. He states that approximately the same number of people who lost jobs in retail have gained employment in warehousing and transportation, channels created by the e-commerce boom. This point is one of the more pivotal ones Thompson makes. It hints at the future of retail in the U.S. and its lasting economic effects. E-commerce is not sounding a death knell; instead, it is spearheading a transition to a different type of economy — one more focused on warehousing and transportation than on customer-facing retail work. There remains a need for customer-facing roles, and likely always will be. But e-commerce is fundamentally transforming the economics of retail.

One of the final points Thompson makes is a call for short-term assistance — an appeal to pathos and the emotional side of readers who want to help. Using phrases such as "grim work lives" and "angry working-class voter," Thompson conveys genuine feeling for the affected laid-off worker and intends for the reader to act on that emotion. What is noteworthy is that this emotional appeal is not disproportionate relative to logos and ethos. There is still enough logic and reason throughout the article. The author recognizes that losing a job is difficult for an employee and his or her family, and conveys these points with diction that is simultaneously emotional and demonstrative of pathos. He is nonetheless able to contextualize that reality within a broader understanding of the positive effects of the shift from physical retail to e-commerce. That shift is eliminating some jobs but creating others in industries outside of retail. The overall impact is therefore neither wholly negative nor wholly positive — it is indicative of a transformation in how the economy functions. Although the physical retail industry is losing certain facets of its market share to e-commerce, it is doing so in a way that generates gains in other industries — gains that can benefit the very same workers who lost retail jobs, which is one of Thompson's more astute observations.

Conclusion: Transformation, Not Extinction

Overall, it appears that it is not necessary to lament the end of physical retail locations simply because of e-commerce. As Freedman has revealed, the most competitive players in these spaces are adopting a symbiotic approach, utilizing the best of both online and physical shopping. The consumer will continue to visit retail locations for personalized and specialized shopping experiences. The key to these experiences is the kind of human interaction that has always been at the core of shopping. Online shopping has not supplanted this need — it has merely changed it into one more tailored to the desires of the individual consumer.

In summary, analysis of the three editorials shows that there is a substantial amount of hype alleging the demise of brick-and-mortar retail. A thorough analysis of the tone, pathos, logos, ethos, and content of these editorials indicates those allegations are not well-founded. If anything, e-commerce has signaled the end of retail shopping as it previously existed. It has heralded a transition in which displaced workers find employment in different industries, and in which shopping in physical locations becomes a more enjoyable and specialized experience — tailored to the particular business domain of the store in question. The future of retail is not one of extinction, but of evolution.

Works Cited

Durden, Tyler. "Amazon Soars On Report Of 'Unbelievable' Online Sales As Channel Checks Show Store Traffic Down 1%." ZeroHedge, 27 Nov. 2017. Web.

Freedman, Daniel. "Bricks, Mortar — and Experiences." Editorial. Wall Street Journal, 20 Aug. 2017. Web.

Koss, Amy. "Amazon.com is a 21st century deal with the devil." Editorial. LA Times, 5 Jun. 2017. Web.

Thompson, Allan. "As Retail Goes, So Goes the Nation." New York Times, 21 Apr. 2017. Web.