394
submitted 7 months ago by HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world 68 points 7 months ago

They're referring to the "halo effect" of Apple accepting the claim of antisemitism.

Truthful or not, Apple is sort of an "influencer" when it comes to ethics, with one of the few openly gay CEOs in big tech and a history of doing, or at least claiming to do, the right thing when any negative labor practices are revealed.

I think there is a sense that if Apple is willing to walk away, it's a signal to other companies that the problem is real.

[-] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 40 points 7 months ago

I think there is a sense that if Apple is willing to walk away, it's a signal to other companies that the problem is real.

I agree that Apple may be the canary in the coal mine but I propose a motive beyond ethics.

It may be that Apple has seen a reduction in traffic from ads on Twitter recently and this latest move by Musk, coupled with everything else, gave them leverage to get out of any contracted ad buys. They pull ineffective ads, help their brand and ethics image, and save money doing it.

The cynic in me says whatever the motivation the largest driver is financial.

[-] RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago

My reading of the "it's not just about money" statement was, "it's not just about losing Apple's advertising spend".

[-] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 3 points 7 months ago

I agree, and I may have muddled that in my response. I was more proposing an alternative to Apple’s “influencer” in ethics status being a driver for their departure, or for other companies.

Positing that ethics may be a factor but ultimately that Apple’s motivation is financial and other businesses understand that. They’ll see it as the tide turning to where Twitter advertising is going to start hurting brands this the halo effect.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

The cynic in me says whatever the motivation the largest driver is financial.

Always is. “Ethics” is just a guide to survival as a society- corporate ethics is really just a guide to survival, too. Which is why so many corporations seem unethical to people… their guide to survival is “lie cheat and steal”… where people see that as problematic.

[-] s_s@lemmy.one 6 points 7 months ago

You are talking like Apple isn't still pumping elons garbage through their devices for a 30% cut.

They'd pull the app if they really cared.

[-] RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

You are talking like Apple isn’t still pumping elons garbage through their devices for a 30% cut.

While Apple takes a 30% cut of app sales, as far as I know, they don't make money from people using the free app. I don't know that Twitter offers any in-app purchases that would be processed through Apple's payment system.

[-] letsgocrazy@lemm.ee -1 points 7 months ago

Why would they pull an app that millions of their customers enjoy and may well have purchased their devices for, just because the owner said something they don't like?

[-] vagrantprodigy@lemmy.whynotdrs.org 4 points 7 months ago

It's sad that anyone would associate Apple with ethics. They clearly haven't looked into their China factories.

[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 7 months ago

Just 8 years ago Apple and Google settled a lawsuit where they kept pay for engineers down by having an illegal non-poaching agreement where they agreed to not recruit each others talent.

They are all bastards.

[-] RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

I agree. But that seems to be the perception. I mean, it's easy to imagine Apple taking a stand against antisemitism, but a little more difficult to imagine Samsung or Motorola taking such a stand.

But as to whether their actual on-the-ground ethical standards are any better than the competition, I rather doubt it.

[-] PopShark@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

I didn’t know Tim Cook was gay today I learned

[-] S_204@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

Ya, I'm gladdened to see that it's not part of his story at every turn. I feel like that's a positive thing. Acceptance is good.

[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It was a huge part of his story when Apple was dodging taxes, mostly because they used PR to kind of hide behind him just coming out as a cudgel to say any criticism or questions about Apple tax dodging were driven by homophobia.

It's sickening when rich people use minority status to hand wave away legitimate criticism that has nothing to do with their minority status.

Guy was running the richest company in the US and had a large team of private security at his behest but he was "brave" for coming out as gay. There was so much PR pushing that the time it was gross.

Nah the no-name poverty-stricken kid growing up in a tiny town in the South who risks having the living shit kicked out of him daily for being gay is the kind of person who is brave for coming out. Not a top paid corporate board member who is basically untouchable.

I'm not saying Tim Cook has never faced discrimination, but as the CEO of Apple? His position of power absolutely insulates him from the worst abuses most in the LGBT community face.

[-] Default_Defect@midwest.social 2 points 7 months ago

Hes probably gay more than just today too.

this post was submitted on 18 Nov 2023
394 points (87.3% liked)

News

21734 readers
3656 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS