Obviously a hit piece. As mentioned above, these suppliers don't work exclusively for Apple. These conditions and much worse are commonplace for Far East suppliers from my understanding. Singling out Apple is grossly unfair. In fact, I think Apple should INDEED sue. The piece contains information and implications known to be false, and is malicious. I don't know about British law, but that's enough for a libel suit.
What is going on in this thread? Americans slagging off Brits and vice versa? The bad lot are Boka Haram, ISIS and the Taliban, oh and a duff President and Prime Minister who took both our militaries to war on duff intelligence. Come on you lot get a grip we're on the same side.
Do you also laugh when paediatricians get attacked by idiots who think they're child molesters? Because that's the same level of link.
Bad, stupid, contemptible. Wear it with pride.
I don't give two hoots about any terrorist supporting channels or those that work for them. It is a state funded channel, and Qatar is a dictatorship. I am not surprised that certain western leftists would admire such a channel.
This is war, and being a "journalist" is indeed a risky business. Sometimes crap happens. It doesn't bother me at all. I applaud it.
It is worth noting that the BBC News website has given full coverage to Apple's response. The BBC anti-Apple slant has always been real, but patchy. Whether it was related to the Micro is hard to say, but that's an interesting hypothesis. The degeneration of parts of this thread into political ranting suggest that many here are simply unfamiliar with the BBC and its reporting which, by and large, is more factual and less partisan than almost anything originating here in the US.
OI agree in general, I watch and read the Beeb daily. That show was a travesty though.
the furniture you bought made from rain forest wood cut from under native peoples.
Only furniture for the super-rich is made from rain forest wood. Most furniture today is made from recycled materials with a laminate skin. You can't even buy "lumber-core" plywood anymore, regardless of how much you're willing to pay.
Nothing is worse than being lectured by naive hypocrites. You have these occupy wall street types, rallying against big corporations, standing there in their Nike sneakers, their North Face jackets, their Levi's jeans, spreading their message via social media using their iPhones. What a bunch of damn fools! You have mega rich millionaires who own multiple houses (fatso Michael Moore) who also supports the OWC crowd.
We are all hypocrits, it's only a question of degree
Don't watch them at all, but I don't think you quite understand or know Al Jazeera. You should find out why dictators and fundamentalists in the Middle East hate them even more than uninformed Americans do.
My opinion of Al Jazeera is based on following certain events and coverage going back more than a decade.
As for certain fundamentalists and dictators hating them, the whole Mid East is a huge, primitive hate fest. Al Jazeera themselves are a dictatorship funded channel.
What Apple are more afraid of is losing out on the cheap supply of labour by not dealing with the Chinese Government. China is a Communist state and even these new Factories are really Government controlled. Apple should insist the workers are paid a fair rate and given reasonable conditions to work under. Apple themselves are not badly paying the workers as they have sub contracted out production to Foxconn. Apple have very strict rules themselves on quality and their stores. They should say to these Chinese companies conform to Apples guideline for workers welfare 100% or lose the contract. The only thing the BBC report did not do was to compare how the other American companies do exactly the same thing, getting stuff made cheaply in China for maximum profit. I am sure Samsung do exactly the same as Apple, possibly even worse. Apples profit margin is so huge they could afford to go to other component manufacturers and pay a slightly greater price and ensure better fairer conditions. Something like the Fair Trade symbol for suppliers of Coffee and Chocolate but for Electronic components. Apple could even build its own factory in American. Have they thought about that?
Yes, it was a joke. As for the colonists being brits, weren't most of them kicked out of their country (criminals, like those sent to Australia) or others who didn't believe in the politics and were looking for a fresh start?
I wasn't aware of the BBC Micro, I would have thought that was a small car. (ok that was another attempt at a joke.) It appears that everyone wants to copy everything Apple does no matter what business they are in. Perfect example is Amazon. They're started out as a cut rate on-line store but now they try and produce all sorts of things. Actually why aren't they included in this BBC show since they enable these activities by selling everything?
one more thing: I just remembered that I'm a son of a DAR (who was embarrased by that) with one of my ancestors immigrating from the Rhode Island area to NY in the late 1600's. Mt great....grandfather was a Tanner but I don't know why he came to this side of the ocean.
I don't believe from what I've read the Americas were anything like Australia in that respect. Many of the original settlements in the American continent were set up as trading posts. They grew and flourished over time (as they annihilated the indigenous population along the way) and many came from Britain simply to seek their fame and fortune. Much like Britain had been the similar landfall for so many from Europe over the millennia, it's something about 'going west' I suspect! LOL . Penal colonies in Australia did indeed exist.
Regarding the 'escaping' part, perhaps you are thinking of the so called Pilgrim Fathers. ( As an aside, I sat next to several people at Thanks Giving dinner last year who thought they were the first people to land in America! lol). BTW, my reading on this is those numb nuts were not escaping as much as being thrown out. Albeit they got to write their own version of the facts this side of the Atlantic it seems. By the time those characters got 'lost' on the way to Virginia and hit Plymouth Rock instead, as they named it, there were a lot of thriving settlements on this side. They took their weird and extremist form of puritanism to the unlucky North East instead. Much to the chagrin of the ladies of Salem and to the relief of England and the Netherlands.
How sad a company like Apple is lambasted by a news organization such as the BBC. The head line is a somewhere between an outright lie and a malicious misstatement of fact. One would think a news organization would report the truth, but when was the last time one did that. Unfortunately, BBC was looking to perk up their numbers at Apple's expense. The companies are not owned by Apple; the are suppliers to Apple and other technology companies. If they do not supply Apple they will supply someone whose corporate responsibility is less than Apple's. Apple has made great headway with their suppliers and they hold them responsible to high standards. That is why the suppliers are not 100% compliant. Instead, we have a news organization such as BBC who is not responsible for anything they print or say. It is so easy to try to beat down a company like Apple that BBC chose the route of misstatement or lying above doing their home work and telling the truth. What about the other companies ? What about the news organizations ? Now how terribly hard or difficult is it to tell the truth ? Apparently BBC found it easier to lie.
Reports like this actually can hurt the cause they supposedly support. While this report does bring attention to the poor working conditions in China and other places. Framing as though it's the cause of one company (Apple) belittles the problem and doesn't foster good solutions.
What if I were to say:
Quote:
Honda is a horrible company! Their products burn a toxic fuel called "gasoline" that emits toxic pollution into the air we breathe! On top of this all of the CO2 released by these Honda's is causing global warming which threatens our very civilization!
Well! no one should every buy a Honda again!
Clearly the way this argument, though factually true, is framed makes the whole thing essentially false! While Honda does play a part in global warming, the actual problem is our ENTIRE transportation system (and for the most part our entire energy system) being based on carbon fuels. If anything, Honda is one of the better performing companies in this regard.
In a similar fashion, the actual problem discussed here, is that most of the worlds electronic(and many other industries) manufacturing is handled in these same factories in the same, if not worse conditions. and Apple, though it has a part in the problem, is one of the better companies out there in this regard.
To make any actual change; we need honest stories about this issue.
You are right. It was the Colonists and the French that kicked you out of the new world.
Then why is Elizabeth II still Queen of Canada?
becauseCanadians are too nice to kick out the harmless old biddy, who AFAICT is refusing to drop off this mortal coil asshe is trying to outlast her idiot son so her grandson can get the crown. Thus preserving the monarchy.
Australian immigrant joke: You know what is the best thing about England? Paris.
Do you also laugh when paediatricians get attacked by idiots who think they're child molesters? Because that's the same level of link.
Bad, stupid, contemptible. Wear it with pride.
I don't give two hoots about any terrorist supporting channels or those that work for them. It is a state funded channel, and Qatar is a dictatorship. I am not surprised that certain western leftists would admire such a channel.
This is war, and being a "journalist" is indeed a risky business. Sometimes crap happens. It doesn't bother me at all. I applaud it.
I suspect that you made an early judgement on the organization based on name and ownership, and then never actually checked it out as a news source. It's surprisingly balanced as far as I can tell. I have yet to see any content that could be interpreted as supporting terrorism. Which news sources do you prefer?
Philosophical issue: why does state owned media still exist? Where is the market failure?
Maybe I’m misunderstanding the question, but how can it not fail? People are forced to pay for it, so it always has the funding it needs, and it can’t be silenced by the government because it is the government.
Philosophical issue: why does state owned media still exist? Where is the market failure?
And isn't the BBC licence terribly regressive?
Just the expression "state-owned media", in implying "state-controlled media", misses the point to begin with. State control of the BBC has always been rather minimal. The license system does seem archaic but, historically, it has permitted a well-funded and high-quality source of news, documentaries and other programming without the annoying commercials that everyone else endures and without an imposed partisan bias. There is nothing wrong with government funding per se if it doesn't engage in editorial meddling. That does not mean that every program is good, or balanced, and the Panorama documentary in question does not look like one of their finest moments.
Comments
Really? I mean really? There's more factual content in the Beano.
Really? I mean really? Watch some Al Jazeera and then come back and tell me what the factual problems were.
Being the bad person that I am, I will admit that I chuckled when the USA "mistakingly" bombed Al Jazeera a while back.
Do you also laugh when paediatricians get attacked by idiots who think they're child molesters? Because that's the same level of link.
Bad, stupid, contemptible. Wear it with pride.
Do you also laugh when paediatricians get attacked by idiots who think they're child molesters? Because that's the same level of link.
Bad, stupid, contemptible. Wear it with pride.
I don't give two hoots about any terrorist supporting channels or those that work for them. It is a state funded channel, and Qatar is a dictatorship. I am not surprised that certain western leftists would admire such a channel.
This is war, and being a "journalist" is indeed a risky business. Sometimes crap happens. It doesn't bother me at all. I applaud it.
OI agree in general, I watch and read the Beeb daily. That show was a travesty though.
the furniture you bought made from rain forest wood cut from under native peoples.
Only furniture for the super-rich is made from rain forest wood. Most furniture today is made from recycled materials with a laminate skin. You can't even buy "lumber-core" plywood anymore, regardless of how much you're willing to pay.
Don't watch them at all, but I don't think you quite understand or know Al Jazeera. You should find out why dictators and fundamentalists in the Middle East hate them even more than uninformed Americans do.
My opinion of Al Jazeera is based on following certain events and coverage going back more than a decade.
As for certain fundamentalists and dictators hating them, the whole Mid East is a huge, primitive hate fest. Al Jazeera themselves are a dictatorship funded channel.
We are all hypocrits, it's only a question of degree
Sure, I can't disagree with that. We are all hypocrites to a certain extent, some worse than others.
I don't believe from what I've read the Americas were anything like Australia in that respect. Many of the original settlements in the American continent were set up as trading posts. They grew and flourished over time (as they annihilated the indigenous population along the way) and many came from Britain simply to seek their fame and fortune. Much like Britain had been the similar landfall for so many from Europe over the millennia, it's something about 'going west' I suspect! LOL . Penal colonies in Australia did indeed exist.
Regarding the 'escaping' part, perhaps you are thinking of the so called Pilgrim Fathers. ( As an aside, I sat next to several people at Thanks Giving dinner last year who thought they were the first people to land in America! lol). BTW, my reading on this is those numb nuts were not escaping as much as being thrown out. Albeit they got to write their own version of the facts this side of the Atlantic it seems. By the time those characters got 'lost' on the way to Virginia and hit Plymouth Rock instead, as they named it, there were a lot of thriving settlements on this side. They took their weird and extremist form of puritanism to the unlucky North East instead. Much to the chagrin of the ladies of Salem and to the relief of England and the Netherlands.
Reports like this actually can hurt the cause they supposedly support. While this report does bring attention to the poor working conditions in China and other places. Framing as though it's the cause of one company (Apple) belittles the problem and doesn't foster good solutions.
What if I were to say:
Well! no one should every buy a Honda again!
Clearly the way this argument, though factually true, is framed makes the whole thing essentially false! While Honda does play a part in global warming, the actual problem is our ENTIRE transportation system (and for the most part our entire energy system) being based on carbon fuels. If anything, Honda is one of the better performing companies in this regard.
In a similar fashion, the actual problem discussed here, is that most of the worlds electronic(and many other industries) manufacturing is handled in these same factories in the same, if not worse conditions. and Apple, though it has a part in the problem, is one of the better companies out there in this regard.
To make any actual change; we need honest stories about this issue.
Australian immigrant joke: You know what is the best thing about England? Paris.
And isn't the BBC licence terribly regressive?
Do you also laugh when paediatricians get attacked by idiots who think they're child molesters? Because that's the same level of link.
Bad, stupid, contemptible. Wear it with pride.
I don't give two hoots about any terrorist supporting channels or those that work for them. It is a state funded channel, and Qatar is a dictatorship. I am not surprised that certain western leftists would admire such a channel.
This is war, and being a "journalist" is indeed a risky business. Sometimes crap happens. It doesn't bother me at all. I applaud it.
I suspect that you made an early judgement on the organization based on name and ownership, and then never actually checked it out as a news source. It's surprisingly balanced as far as I can tell. I have yet to see any content that could be interpreted as supporting terrorism. Which news sources do you prefer?
Philosophical issue: why does state owned media still exist? Where is the market failure?
Maybe I’m misunderstanding the question, but how can it not fail? People are forced to pay for it, so it always has the funding it needs, and it can’t be silenced by the government because it is the government.
Philosophical issue: why does state owned media still exist? Where is the market failure?
And isn't the BBC licence terribly regressive?
Just the expression "state-owned media", in implying "state-controlled media", misses the point to begin with. State control of the BBC has always been rather minimal. The license system does seem archaic but, historically, it has permitted a well-funded and high-quality source of news, documentaries and other programming without the annoying commercials that everyone else endures and without an imposed partisan bias. There is nothing wrong with government funding per se if it doesn't engage in editorial meddling. That does not mean that every program is good, or balanced, and the Panorama documentary in question does not look like one of their finest moments.
Okay, but check out the DETAILS as BBC has them and correct what, if anything, is found to actually exist: and report back what didn't.
APPLE wins, the workers win.