When you go into Subway for a sandwich, you are contracting the creation of that sandwich to one of their labourers.
Is it now your job to ensure that this labourer gets a fare wage and proper breaks?
I'd argue that it is everyone's responsibility (as much as possible) to be knowledgeable about the things they purchase and what goes into making them. Many people already do this for the content of their food (fat, salt, etc) so why not for the working conditions and materials used to create the products they buy? Every action (no matter how small) contributes to the state of the world. The more knowledgeable we are, the more we can do to stop the people who are exploiting others (not talking about Apple, but a lot of the manufacturing used by big tech companies).
Obviously your ad absurdum example of knowing the intricate details of the Subway worker's shift is taking it too far. But you'd probably care if Subway was importing ingredients from countries that don't have as strict health regulations as the US right?
Quote:
No, of course it's not. Same applies with Apple.
No other companies do any checks at all regarding all of this stuff so at least Apple try.
Actually, there are plenty of other companies that do the same. The one I work for recently went public with their conflict mineral usage report (along with many other tech companies in North America).
But I do agree that, by only reporting part of the story, and not including the other companies which contract work out to these manufacturers, it feels more like a sensationalist news piece rather than one which is well researched. But then, I'd argue that the vast majority of news these days is designed for people with short attention spans (very little detail).
Same old same old ... formulaic story containing the words "Apple" and "bad things happening" that drives clicks and viewership. The rest of the world's manufacturers get a free pass to continue their exploitation and the one company that actually gives a damn about worker rights and safety takes another sacrificial beating at the hands of the holier than thou media pundits and wannabes.
I'd be perfectly okay with the BBC running a story about how a company other than Apple, a company that is producing product on the scale, magnitude, and quality of Apple is for a worldwide market and doing a > 90% perfect job of policing worker rights and safety in countries too lax to enforce their own laws, including all workers in the supply chain from raw materials, transportation, and intermediate processing. Go find that icon of perfection that you can then go to Apple and say "why can't you be more like Company X? If Company X can do it on a worldwide basis why can't Apple?" Challenge Apple with a better example of corporate responsibility and leadership.
Of course you won't see this because there is no company of Apple's magnitude that comes remotely close to providing the leadership and processes for ensuring worker rights and worker safety that Apple provides today.
Prove me wrong BBC so we don't think your no better than any other finger pointing opportunist slug that's too lazy to provide objective and quantitative evidence of which companies are acting responsibly and which ones are getting a free ride and flying under your singularly narrow, one sided, and intentionally punitive focus on the one company trying to make a difference.
The ball is in your court BBC, let's see some objectivity by comparison for a change.
Actually, the final breaking of the UK was America threatening to sell your debt over the Suez Canal. It was a mistake in retrospect, but if you wanted a moment that it became clear the UK was finished as a world power, that was it.
I was pitching the end of Pax Britannica and the British hegemony at WW1, but if you want to extend it another 40 years that's fine with me.
Aside, I think any nuclear nation with a seat on the security council and an internationally relevant economy and military presence can reasonably be called a "world power". Not "the" world power for sure, but that's a hard position to maintain when everyone's looking to take a chunk out of you. Just ask Apple.
If so, the working conditions in many American companies would be pitiable by comparison.
Straw man. I'm talking basic things like child labour (pick a reasonable age), maximum number of hours per week (pick a reasonable number), no exposure to hazardous materials/chemicals, etc. Surely we can agree on basic humane conditions like that even if we don't go so far as to mandate contentious things like amount of sick days/vacation time, minimum wage (which would have to depend on the area of the world) and whatnot.
Apple cares a lot more than all the other manufacturers of electronics. You don't hear stories about Dell, HP, Samsung, and so on. Because they don't do anything for there suppliers. And remember that all of these companies get stuff done by these same suppliers not just Apple. This isn't just an Apple story but it seems to always come out that way because Apple is the only one trying to do something about it. Remember it is also the suppliers responsibility to be following the guide lines that Apple is putting out there. But if they are not then they are far more responsible than Apple for there woes and there employees.
From the little presented to us, I'd say your comment is correct. However, I don't believe there is a single Far East supplier that works exclusively for Apple so this was basically a hit piece by the BBC. If they wanted to be fair, they would have included the other consumers of these facilities instead of blaming everything on Apple but that wouldn't have created the number of "hits" for the BBC. Of course, the Brits are still pissed we kicked them out of the new world.
I agree with everything said there except the silly last comment, I assume a poor joke. There was no 'We' that kicked 'them' out as you seem imagine. The colonists were Brits!
Back OT, Yes the Panorama show should have been generic not focussed on Apple who are leaders in improving the very conditions they researched, that are so prevalent in the developing nations. This is just more click bait on the back of anti-Apple sentiment and pro Apple defense. Mentioning Apple tied to anything contentious is a win win for sleazy and lazy reporters. As an aside, the BBC has always had an anti-Apple slant going back to the days of their own attempt to enter the computer field with the BBC Micro.
I agree with everything said there except the silly last comment, I assume a poor joke. There was no 'We' that kicked 'them' out as you seem imagine. The colonists were Brits!
Back OT, Yes the Panorama show should have been generic not focussed on Apple who are leaders in improving the very conditions they researched, that are so prevalent in the developing nations. This is just more click bait on the back of anti-Apple sentiment and pro Apple defense. Mentioning Apple tied to anything contentious is a win win for sleazy and lazy reporters. As an aside, the BBC has always had an anti-Apple slant going back to the days of their own attempt to enter the computer field with the BBC Micro.
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 can understand why the story was focused on Apple... Apple is a company that says and does things. When put it out there, there are going to people that will check up on it. A story like this is not that difficult to do. Apple posts their Supplier Responsibility report other website for all to see. Anyone can take that report and see what exactly is going on.If Apple is lying or not.
The issues with the story is that everything is taken out of context and perspective. First of all, the number of suppliers is huge. It is simply not possible for Apple to be in those places all the time. Second, they're blaming Apple for these conditions even though Apple does not employ these workers. Apple cannot control the management of these companies. Al they can do is say, "We'll take our business elsewhere."
The story would've been less bias if is were more balanced...
1. Yes, shit happens in these factories/mines, but Apple goes out of their way to discover problems and hold companies responsible to create better working environments for their employees.
2. Many, many other electronics companies turn a blind eye to what's going on, and Apple is one of the few that brings it out and reports on it.
3. Apple only makes a small fraction of all the world's electronics devices that are built by these places - we shouldn't really be surprised that it's not enough for them to go alone to actually make a significant difference - all OEMs need to step up.
4. Anyone can look for themselves by going to Apple's website and read Apple's Supplier Responsibility report. This isn't a report to make Apple look good, it's a report to make suppliers look bad, who do not treat their workers fairly.
5. And finally, Apple didn't break any promises, the employers of those workers did. They promised Apple specific terms. All Apple promised was that they would continue to audit and dump that supplier if they didn't improve.
Why would Apple be deeply offended by this BBC report? Apple is likely deeply offended for the same reason I am; due to the disingenuous nature of reporting on Apple's supply and manufacturing chain without mentioning the millions of people working in thousands upon thousands of manufacturing facilities all over Southeast Asia where there is insufficient profits to even entertain the notion of bettering working conditions, health and safety issues, and worker pay. Where's the outrage over all those others? Why not champion Apple's efforts as a standard by which all those thousands of other companies should operate? Why not demand that the price of toasters and the other thousands of products sold through big box retailers be raised to the point where the companies manufacturing such products can afford to put in place even a fraction of the initiatives Apple has imposed upon its manufacturing and supply chain? The answer is that these 'news' outlets are less in the business of bringing real news and factual information about what's really happening in the world versus running with sensationalist stories that will capture an uncritical audience. At least 60 Minutes, some years ago, did a report on the dumping of scrap electronics from the west into China, where they're piled up in huge landfills where the poor wade through a toxic stew of carcinogens and breath in mercury and lead vapors as they melt down circuit boards to extract gold and other valuable commodities for a few dollars a week. In what world does it make sense to continue to beat on the one company that's doing the most to change conditions while ignoring hundreds of easily identifiable stories that truly need reporting? That's the height of hypocrisy and disingenuity.
Straw man. I'm talking basic things like child labour (pick a reasonable age), maximum number of hours per week (pick a reasonable number), no exposure to hazardous materials/chemicals, etc. Surely we can agree on basic humane conditions like that even if we don't go so far as to mandate contentious things like amount of sick days/vacation time, minimum wage (which would have to depend on the area of the world) and whatnot.
Thousands of companies already report that, if you'd care to look it up. Look up 'Reporting under GRI 3' if you'd like to learn more. Also look up Apple's Supplier Responsibility and Corporate Responsibility Reports.
From the little presented to us, I'd say your comment is correct. However, I don't believe there is a single Far East supplier that works exclusively for Apple so this was basically a hit piece by the BBC. If they wanted to be fair, they would have included the other consumers of these facilities instead of blaming everything on Apple but that wouldn't have created the number of "hits" for the BBC. Of course, the Brits are still pissed we kicked them out of the new world.
I agree with everything said there except the silly last comment, I assume a poor joke. There was no 'We' that kicked 'them' out as you seem imagine. The colonists were Brits!
Back OT, Yes the Panorama show should have been generic not focussed on Apple who are leaders in improving the very conditions they researched, that are so prevalent in the developing nations. This is just more click bait on the back of anti-Apple sentiment and pro Apple defense. Mentioning Apple tied to anything contentious is a win win for sleazy and lazy reporters. As an aside, the BBC has always had an anti-Apple slant going back to the days of their own attempt to enter the computer field with the BBC Micro.
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.
Good for Apple for having some balls and aggressively slamming back against that shoddy and inaccurate, lazily made program! That's how Apple needs to deal with these factually incorrect, agenda driven, biased attacks! Journalism is only getting worse and worse these days. And there are almost never any consequences to be had for the perpetrators.
This BBC program only makes the BBC look bad and it is their credibility that suffers as a result of it. I suggest that they go back to covering up for rape or some other worthy cause instead of attacking Apple, which is doing more than any other damn company, when it comes to how workers are treated in foreign countries.
And those people in that other thread who blindly jumped in and defended the BBC's terrible reporting are obviously a naive bunch who would believe anything. I bet that they believed that laughable Rolling Stones gang rape story recently, and I also bet that they believed that recent hoax about some teenager who made 72 million in the stock market.
P.T. Barnum wasn't wrong when he allegedly said, there's a sucker born every minute!
Welcome to modern exploitive capitalism. Apple is better than most BY FAR. Look at the clothes and shoes you are wearing, made in far more exploitive conditions by small underfed people & children in Bangladesh, the baubles you bought at the big box store of your choice, the furniture you bought made from rain forest wood cut from under native peoples.
Even in the computer industry, things are much worse all the way around. HP making servers in Mexico by Mexicans making under $1/day, etc....
Comments
When you go into Subway for a sandwich, you are contracting the creation of that sandwich to one of their labourers.
Is it now your job to ensure that this labourer gets a fare wage and proper breaks?
I'd argue that it is everyone's responsibility (as much as possible) to be knowledgeable about the things they purchase and what goes into making them. Many people already do this for the content of their food (fat, salt, etc) so why not for the working conditions and materials used to create the products they buy? Every action (no matter how small) contributes to the state of the world. The more knowledgeable we are, the more we can do to stop the people who are exploiting others (not talking about Apple, but a lot of the manufacturing used by big tech companies).
Obviously your ad absurdum example of knowing the intricate details of the Subway worker's shift is taking it too far. But you'd probably care if Subway was importing ingredients from countries that don't have as strict health regulations as the US right?
No other companies do any checks at all regarding all of this stuff so at least Apple try.
Actually, there are plenty of other companies that do the same. The one I work for recently went public with their conflict mineral usage report (along with many other tech companies in North America).
But I do agree that, by only reporting part of the story, and not including the other companies which contract work out to these manufacturers, it feels more like a sensationalist news piece rather than one which is well researched. But then, I'd argue that the vast majority of news these days is designed for people with short attention spans (very little detail).
I'd be perfectly okay with the BBC running a story about how a company other than Apple, a company that is producing product on the scale, magnitude, and quality of Apple is for a worldwide market and doing a > 90% perfect job of policing worker rights and safety in countries too lax to enforce their own laws, including all workers in the supply chain from raw materials, transportation, and intermediate processing. Go find that icon of perfection that you can then go to Apple and say "why can't you be more like Company X? If Company X can do it on a worldwide basis why can't Apple?" Challenge Apple with a better example of corporate responsibility and leadership.
Of course you won't see this because there is no company of Apple's magnitude that comes remotely close to providing the leadership and processes for ensuring worker rights and worker safety that Apple provides today.
Prove me wrong BBC so we don't think your no better than any other finger pointing opportunist slug that's too lazy to provide objective and quantitative evidence of which companies are acting responsibly and which ones are getting a free ride and flying under your singularly narrow, one sided, and intentionally punitive focus on the one company trying to make a difference.
The ball is in your court BBC, let's see some objectivity by comparison for a change.
.... why not for the working conditions and materials used to create the products they buy?
Using whose standards? Sweden's?
If so, the working conditions in many American companies would be pitiable by comparison.
Aside, I think any nuclear nation with a seat on the security council and an internationally relevant economy and military presence can reasonably be called a "world power". Not "the" world power for sure, but that's a hard position to maintain when everyone's looking to take a chunk out of you. Just ask Apple.
Using whose standards? Sweden's?
If so, the working conditions in many American companies would be pitiable by comparison.
Straw man. I'm talking basic things like child labour (pick a reasonable age), maximum number of hours per week (pick a reasonable number), no exposure to hazardous materials/chemicals, etc. Surely we can agree on basic humane conditions like that even if we don't go so far as to mandate contentious things like amount of sick days/vacation time, minimum wage (which would have to depend on the area of the world) and whatnot.
I agree with everything said there except the silly last comment, I assume a poor joke. There was no 'We' that kicked 'them' out as you seem imagine. The colonists were Brits!
Back OT, Yes the Panorama show should have been generic not focussed on Apple who are leaders in improving the very conditions they researched, that are so prevalent in the developing nations. This is just more click bait on the back of anti-Apple sentiment and pro Apple defense. Mentioning Apple tied to anything contentious is a win win for sleazy and lazy reporters. As an aside, the BBC has always had an anti-Apple slant going back to the days of their own attempt to enter the computer field with the BBC Micro.
1. We're not pissed.
2. You didn't.
You are right. It was the Colonists and the French that kicked you out of the new world.
I agree with everything said there except the silly last comment, I assume a poor joke. There was no 'We' that kicked 'them' out as you seem imagine. The colonists were Brits!
Back OT, Yes the Panorama show should have been generic not focussed on Apple who are leaders in improving the very conditions they researched, that are so prevalent in the developing nations. This is just more click bait on the back of anti-Apple sentiment and pro Apple defense. Mentioning Apple tied to anything contentious is a win win for sleazy and lazy reporters. As an aside, the BBC has always had an anti-Apple slant going back to the days of their own attempt to enter the computer field with the BBC Micro.
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.
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?
In precisely the same way Apple uses its prominence - where it has it and can do so - to leverage change and improvement,
so do crusaders leverage Apple's profile to draw attention and outrage where it needs to be drawn.
Apple should be disappointed that a fairer view of its Herculean efforts on behalf of workers and the environment
are less often seen and portrayed accurately, but might also perceive that the end result may benefit,
both from their efforts, and, morbidly, from their vilification...
I've usually not really understood a bunch of Romans (and others) falling on their swords
for honor and a noble cause...perhaps Apple should quietly view this as a silver lining.
I can understand why the story was focused on Apple... Apple is a company that says and does things. When put it out there, there are going to people that will check up on it. A story like this is not that difficult to do. Apple posts their Supplier Responsibility report other website for all to see. Anyone can take that report and see what exactly is going on.If Apple is lying or not.
The issues with the story is that everything is taken out of context and perspective. First of all, the number of suppliers is huge. It is simply not possible for Apple to be in those places all the time. Second, they're blaming Apple for these conditions even though Apple does not employ these workers. Apple cannot control the management of these companies. Al they can do is say, "We'll take our business elsewhere."
The story would've been less bias if is were more balanced...
1. Yes, shit happens in these factories/mines, but Apple goes out of their way to discover problems and hold companies responsible to create better working environments for their employees.
2. Many, many other electronics companies turn a blind eye to what's going on, and Apple is one of the few that brings it out and reports on it.
3. Apple only makes a small fraction of all the world's electronics devices that are built by these places - we shouldn't really be surprised that it's not enough for them to go alone to actually make a significant difference - all OEMs need to step up.
4. Anyone can look for themselves by going to Apple's website and read Apple's Supplier Responsibility report. This isn't a report to make Apple look good, it's a report to make suppliers look bad, who do not treat their workers fairly.
5. And finally, Apple didn't break any promises, the employers of those workers did. They promised Apple specific terms. All Apple promised was that they would continue to audit and dump that supplier if they didn't improve.
Then why is Elizabeth II still Queen of Canada?
Oh dear. We're getting dangerously close to proving Godwin's Law...
Why would Apple be deeply offended by this BBC report? Apple is likely deeply offended for the same reason I am; due to the disingenuous nature of reporting on Apple's supply and manufacturing chain without mentioning the millions of people working in thousands upon thousands of manufacturing facilities all over Southeast Asia where there is insufficient profits to even entertain the notion of bettering working conditions, health and safety issues, and worker pay. Where's the outrage over all those others? Why not champion Apple's efforts as a standard by which all those thousands of other companies should operate? Why not demand that the price of toasters and the other thousands of products sold through big box retailers be raised to the point where the companies manufacturing such products can afford to put in place even a fraction of the initiatives Apple has imposed upon its manufacturing and supply chain? The answer is that these 'news' outlets are less in the business of bringing real news and factual information about what's really happening in the world versus running with sensationalist stories that will capture an uncritical audience. At least 60 Minutes, some years ago, did a report on the dumping of scrap electronics from the west into China, where they're piled up in huge landfills where the poor wade through a toxic stew of carcinogens and breath in mercury and lead vapors as they melt down circuit boards to extract gold and other valuable commodities for a few dollars a week. In what world does it make sense to continue to beat on the one company that's doing the most to change conditions while ignoring hundreds of easily identifiable stories that truly need reporting? That's the height of hypocrisy and disingenuity.
Straw man. I'm talking basic things like child labour (pick a reasonable age), maximum number of hours per week (pick a reasonable number), no exposure to hazardous materials/chemicals, etc. Surely we can agree on basic humane conditions like that even if we don't go so far as to mandate contentious things like amount of sick days/vacation time, minimum wage (which would have to depend on the area of the world) and whatnot.
Thousands of companies already report that, if you'd care to look it up. Look up 'Reporting under GRI 3' if you'd like to learn more. Also look up Apple's Supplier Responsibility and Corporate Responsibility Reports.
From the little presented to us, I'd say your comment is correct. However, I don't believe there is a single Far East supplier that works exclusively for Apple so this was basically a hit piece by the BBC. If they wanted to be fair, they would have included the other consumers of these facilities instead of blaming everything on Apple but that wouldn't have created the number of "hits" for the BBC. Of course, the Brits are still pissed we kicked them out of the new world.
I agree with everything said there except the silly last comment, I assume a poor joke. There was no 'We' that kicked 'them' out as you seem imagine. The colonists were Brits!
Back OT, Yes the Panorama show should have been generic not focussed on Apple who are leaders in improving the very conditions they researched, that are so prevalent in the developing nations. This is just more click bait on the back of anti-Apple sentiment and pro Apple defense. Mentioning Apple tied to anything contentious is a win win for sleazy and lazy reporters. As an aside, the BBC has always had an anti-Apple slant going back to the days of their own attempt to enter the computer field with the BBC Micro.
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.
"We know of no other company doing as much as Apple does to ensure fair and safe working conditions"
Why (Apple) phrase their statement this way? Why not challenge the BBC to "show / name" another company doing as much as Apple??
Apple is too mealy-mouthed. Man-up, Apple!!
It is appalling how low the BBC has sunk. It no longer is reliable as a source of unbiased information.
They join the stink of the websites who repeatedly post factually incorrect critical articles of Apple as click bait.
Shame on the BBC and the Queen.
Good for Apple for having some balls and aggressively slamming back against that shoddy and inaccurate, lazily made program! That's how Apple needs to deal with these factually incorrect, agenda driven, biased attacks! Journalism is only getting worse and worse these days. And there are almost never any consequences to be had for the perpetrators.
This BBC program only makes the BBC look bad and it is their credibility that suffers as a result of it. I suggest that they go back to covering up for rape or some other worthy cause instead of attacking Apple, which is doing more than any other damn company, when it comes to how workers are treated in foreign countries.
And those people in that other thread who blindly jumped in and defended the BBC's terrible reporting are obviously a naive bunch who would believe anything. I bet that they believed that laughable Rolling Stones gang rape story recently, and I also bet that they believed that recent hoax about some teenager who made 72 million in the stock market.
P.T. Barnum wasn't wrong when he allegedly said, there's a sucker born every minute!
Even in the computer industry, things are much worse all the way around. HP making servers in Mexico by Mexicans making under $1/day, etc....