Apple refreshes and expands commitment to human rights

Posted:
in General Discussion edited September 2020
Following concerns from its shareholders about Apple allegedly aiding China censorship, the company has published a formal document stating its commitment to upholding human rights.

Tim Cook says Apple is committed to human rights
Tim Cook says Apple is committed to human rights


While Tim Cook has said in front of the House of Judiciary that Apple supports human rights, the company has now formally stated its position in the form of its first-ever policy document on the topic. It comes after shareholders have pressured Apple, both in votes at shareholder meetings and via a petition.

"At Apple, we are optimistic about technology's awesome potential for good," says Cook in a statement at the start of the new document. "But we know that it won't happen on its own. Every day, we work to infuse the devices we make with the humanity that makes us."

The document, called "Our Commitment to Human Rights," is 1,400-word pledge about how Apple treats people and the way it sees technology's role in protecting human rights. It's chiefly a description of principles, but does include some more specific details.

"Our approach is based on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights," it says. "We conduct human rights due diligence to identify risks and work to mitigate them. We seek to remedy adverse impacts, track and measure our progress, and report our findings."

"We believe that dialogue and engagement are the best ways to work toward building a better world," it continues. "In keeping with the UN Guiding Principles, where national law and international human rights standards differ, we follow the higher standard. Where they are in conflict, we respect national law while seeking to respect the principles of internationally recognized human rights."

Tim Cook's quote at the start of Apple's new policy document
Tim Cook's quote at the start of Apple's new policy document


Apple's document does not give a reason for why it is being published now, but it does follow continued pressure from shareholders. According to Sondhya Gupta of the campaigning organisation SumOfUs, it has been published in order to beat Apple's own September 5 deadline for shareholders to submit motions ahead of next year's annual meeting.

She says that at the 2020 shareholders meeting, SumOfUs put forward a proposal against Apple's alleged cooperation with Chinese censorship, and 40.6% of shareholders voted against Apple to support it.

"Apple's adoption of a human rights policy is a breakthrough moment and we commend Apple for taking this first step," says Gupta. "However, we still have questions about how the policy will be implemented and what oversight there will be."

"We will continue to work alongside shareholders and human rights defenders in dialogue with Apple to ensure the company lives up to this responsibility," she continued.

SumoOfUs has been petitioning Apple for at least eight years. A previous petition from the organization had to be reworded following a false claim about working conditions in factories making Apple products.

Apple has not as yet commented publicly about its new policy document.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 2 of 74
    As long as it serves shareholder interests.
    johnbear
  • Reply 3 of 74
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    As long as it serves shareholder interests.

    Is that short term interests or long term?

    Long term it serves them best to act based on the highest of principles.
    montrosemacsOferdysamoria
  • Reply 4 of 74
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    This is very fine line Apple is walking.

    Some want them to impose western style democratic ideology across the globe -- in effect becoming a foot soldier in the propagation of democratic principles.
    Others want them to respect other cultures and obey the laws of the countries in which they operate.

    It's one of those no-win situations: Regardless of which tack Apple takes they will be criticized.   Instead, they are walking with a foot on each side of that line.  I think Tim will be earning his salary on this one!  
  • Reply 5 of 74
    Those in doubt haven't been paying attention. Significant initiatives at Apple regarding human rights, environmental issues and the like were entirely private until forced into the spotlight by various activist groups. (E.g. A good example of this is the story of Apple's green hardware initiatives.)

    prismatics
    said:
    As long as it serves shareholder interests.
    Also regarding "it's only to serve the interest of business/shareholders" (paraphrasing) - Apple is already massively profitable, sure they could enhance their profitability by aping the status quo towards sourcing, energy, environment and human rights - but it's clear that Apple does have some amount of legitimate social morality. Samsung has extensively proven two things: that there are other ways to distract from a poor social record, and that if you set a good-enough price, the bulk of consumers won't care about what happens behind the scenes.

    Steve Jobs had stated ad nauseam "Get out of this stock" to those that suggested Apple should be more profit driven.


    edited September 2020 montrosemacsOferdysamoria
  • Reply 6 of 74
    As long as it serves shareholder interests.

    Is that short term interests or long term?

    Long term it serves them best to act based on the highest of principles.
    U.S. law isn't really supportive of long-term benefits for publicly traded companies.  It's not precisely against long term goals, it just prioritizes them below short term, i.e. fiscal year, and sometimes even quarter, goals.
    Oferdysamoria
  • Reply 7 of 74
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 2,759member


    Steve Jobs had stated ad nauseam "Get out of this stock" to those that suggested Apple should be more profit driven.


    Unfortunately that's not the motto of Cook, who is all about the numbers.
    dysamoria
  • Reply 8 of 74
    As long as it serves shareholder interests.

    Is that short term interests or long term?

    Long term it serves them best to act based on the highest of principles.
    U.S. law isn't really supportive of long-term benefits for publicly traded companies.  It's not precisely against long term goals, it just prioritizes them below short term, i.e. fiscal year, and sometimes even quarter, goals.
    Long-term goals are actually less sensitive to what the laws are, from the perspective of a corporation; the problem is that short-term goals are the low hanging fruit for the people involved.

    For instance, bosses are often given bonuses based on performance; which are measured continuously. Meaning that as a boss you want these quarter goals to absolutely shine, even if that means that the company will take a hit a decade from now.
    GeorgeBMacdysamoria
  • Reply 9 of 74
    0ID00ID0 Posts: 26member
    Under commitment to human rights
    I understand also to block the fu*king Facebook spying on Apple customers, but seems that T. Cook cares more about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$......

    dysamoria
  • Reply 10 of 74
    0ID0 said:
    Under commitment to human rights
    I understand also to block the fu*king Facebook spying on Apple customers, but seems that T. Cook cares more about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$......

    You don't have to use Facebook you know.
    It has been clear for years that you are the target for Facebook. Just stop feeding the dragon.
    montrosemacschristophb
  • Reply 11 of 74
    There is no such thing as “human rights.” If there was, everyone would have them. Apple should stop buckling to pressure from radical progressive groups and stay laser-focused on products and profitability. If any execs from Apple want to be political, they should do it on their own time and not use Apple’s money to do it.
    razorpitelijahgcat52christophb
  • Reply 12 of 74
    There is no such thing as “human rights.” If there was, everyone would have them. Apple should stop buckling to pressure from radical progressive groups and stay laser-focused on products and profitability. If any execs from Apple want to be political, they should do it on their own time and not use Apple’s money to do it.
    Thankfully the world disagrees with this myopic mindset. 
  • Reply 13 of 74
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 1,796member
    There is no such thing as “human rights.” If there was, everyone would have them. Apple should stop buckling to pressure from radical progressive groups and stay laser-focused on products and profitability. If any execs from Apple want to be political, they should do it on their own time and not use Apple’s money to do it.
    Thankfully the world disagrees with this myopic mindset. 
    Maybe yours does, but for the most part the real world doesn’t give a rat’s ass about you or anyone else. It sounds harsh, but so is the real world. If “the world” cared you wouldn’t have the world you have.
    elijahgSpamSandwichcat52
  • Reply 14 of 74
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 2,759member
    There is no such thing as “human rights.” If there was, everyone would have them. Apple should stop buckling to pressure from radical progressive groups and stay laser-focused on products and profitability. If any execs from Apple want to be political, they should do it on their own time and not use Apple’s money to do it.
    I agree, Cook needs to stop using Apple as a political platform. There is nothing to gain by doing so and a lot to lose. Jobs never did it because he knew what a hole he could dig himself and Apple.
    SpamSandwichcat52christophb
  • Reply 15 of 74
    elijahg said:
    There is no such thing as “human rights.” If there was, everyone would have them. Apple should stop buckling to pressure from radical progressive groups and stay laser-focused on products and profitability. If any execs from Apple want to be political, they should do it on their own time and not use Apple’s money to do it.
    I agree, Cook needs to stop using Apple as a political platform. There is nothing to gain by doing so and a lot to lose. Jobs never did it because he knew what a hole he could dig himself and Apple.
    Jobs was political and he made contributions to his political party of choice, but he never advertised that fact and never sought attention for it. This is an unfortunate failing of Tim Cook to not always keep focus on Apple the company and their products.
    cat52razorpit
  • Reply 16 of 74
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 2,759member
    elijahg said:
    There is no such thing as “human rights.” If there was, everyone would have them. Apple should stop buckling to pressure from radical progressive groups and stay laser-focused on products and profitability. If any execs from Apple want to be political, they should do it on their own time and not use Apple’s money to do it.
    I agree, Cook needs to stop using Apple as a political platform. There is nothing to gain by doing so and a lot to lose. Jobs never did it because he knew what a hole he could dig himself and Apple.
    Jobs was political and he made contributions to his political party of choice, but he never advertised that fact and never sought attention for it. This is an unfortunate failing of Tim Cook to not always keep focus on Apple the company and their products.
    He was of course, most people are. But as you say, unlike Cook, he didn't use Apple as a platform for his political ideals. It invites so much criticism and claims of hypocrisy, with Apple's dealings with China as one example.
    muthuk_vanalingamSpamSandwichcat52razorpit
  • Reply 17 of 74
    As long as it serves shareholder interests.
    That’s an outdated way of thinking about management styles. Managing for the stockholders only is meaningful than managing for all stakeholders — including customers, employees, and community. If some investors don’t like that, they’re free to divest and invest in an org that better matches their values. 
    tmaymontrosemacsfastasleepGeorgeBMac
  • Reply 18 of 74

    elijahg said:

    Steve Jobs had stated ad nauseam "Get out of this stock" to those that suggested Apple should be more profit driven.
    Unfortunately that's not the motto of Cook, who is all about the numbers.
    Ignorance on parade. You forgot your sarcasm tag. Cook is killing the numbers, but has even more public positions on corporate values. Famously affirmed when he exclaimed “I don’t consider the bloody ROI!” when an investor complained about the cost of accessibility efforts.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2014/03/07/why-tim-cook-doesnt-care-about-the-bloody-roi/
    tmayanantksundarammontrosemacsfastasleepGeorgeBMac
  • Reply 19 of 74

    There is no such thing as “human rights.” If there was, everyone would have them. Apple should stop buckling to pressure from radical progressive groups and stay laser-focused on products and profitability. If any execs from Apple want to be political, they should do it on their own time and not use Apple’s money to do it.
    Idiotic nonsense. Of course there are. Just because they aren’t recognized by all state actors doesn’t mean they don’t exist. 

    Apple has a culture of shares values, and it’s free to manage to that culture of values. If it offends you, then get out of Apple and stop whining. 
    montrosemacsfastasleepGeorgeBMacdysamoria
  • Reply 20 of 74

    elijahg said:
    There is no such thing as “human rights.” If there was, everyone would have them. Apple should stop buckling to pressure from radical progressive groups and stay laser-focused on products and profitability. If any execs from Apple want to be political, they should do it on their own time and not use Apple’s money to do it.
    I agree, Cook needs to stop using Apple as a political platform. There is nothing to gain by doing so and a lot to lose. Jobs never did it because he knew what a hole he could dig himself and Apple.
    elijahg said:
    There is no such thing as “human rights.” If there was, everyone would have them. Apple should stop buckling to pressure from radical progressive groups and stay laser-focused on products and profitability. If any execs from Apple want to be political, they should do it on their own time and not use Apple’s money to do it.
    I agree, Cook needs to stop using Apple as a political platform. There is nothing to gain by doing so and a lot to lose. Jobs never did it because he knew what a hole he could dig himself and Apple.
    Jobs was political and he made contributions to his political party of choice, but he never advertised that fact and never sought attention for it. This is an unfortunate failing of Tim Cook to not always keep focus on Apple the company and their products.
    razorpit said:
    There is no such thing as “human rights.” If there was, everyone would have them. Apple should stop buckling to pressure from radical progressive groups and stay laser-focused on products and profitability. If any execs from Apple want to be political, they should do it on their own time and not use Apple’s money to do it.
    Thankfully the world disagrees with this myopic mindset. 
    Maybe yours does, but for the most part the real world doesn’t give a rat’s ass about you or anyone else. It sounds harsh, but so is the real world. If “the world” cared you wouldn’t have the world you have.
    Jesus I see the cranks are on parade. Is it a full moon? Sorry but no, discussing an organization’s values, including human rights, gay rights, etc, does not mean one person (Cook) is using Apple as a  political platform. You’re just trying to rationalize your form of unpopular opinion. Apple is and has always been a liberal place...As Jobs often said they’re the intersection of technology and liberal arts. Education, gay rights, HIV research, etc...nothing new for Apple. Just hard for crankpots to accept. Get out of Apple if you don’t like it. But you won’t. 
    tmaymontrosemacssvanstromfastasleepGeorgeBMacdysamoria
Sign In or Register to comment.