Kudos to Apple and Google

[Guest American Woman]

Apple to oppose anti-gay marriage ballot question

Apple has joined Google in publicly opposing a California ballot initiative that would deny marriage rights to same-sex couples.

It's great to see huge corporations like Apple and Google not afraid to take a stand on such an important and controversial issue. Hopefully it will encourage others to speak their mind.

[Argus]

Of course, Google doesn't have a problem helping the Chinese government arrest people who take a stand on important issues there.

Are you really so naive as to believe Apple and Google give a crap about gay rights? They don't care about anything but profits. If they're taking a stand it's because their PR departments have suggested this would be popular among selected target markets and make them seem like modern, cutting edge, etc. etc. I'm sure there was a whole study on it along with flow charts and pie charts demonstrating how much good publicity they'd get and what that would have cost them in advertising.

Edited October 25, 2008 by Charles Anthony
deleted re-copied Opening Post quoted in its entirety

[eyeball]

Argus makes some valid points. I'd like to see a big corporation also make them. Corporations should counter-exploit their competitors unethical practices and especially point out a selective hypocritical exploitation of an issue when they see one. Something along the lines of the negative advertising that politicians engage in but done ethically.

I can't help but recall the number of times I've been told all the big fights over things like human rights have been won. Its fairly obvious however there is still an enormous amount of shit out in the world that needs disturbing.

[Guest American Woman]

Of course, Google doesn't have a problem helping the Chinese government arrest people who take a stand on important issues there.

Link, please.

Are you really so naive as to believe Apple and Google give a crap about gay rights?

I'm knowledgeable enough to know that they do "give a crap" about gay rights.

Apple was among the first California companies to offer equal rights and benefits to [their] employees' same-sex partners...

They don't care about anything but profits. If they're taking a stand it's because their PR departments have suggested this would be popular among selected target markets and make them seem like modern, cutting edge, etc. etc. I'm sure there was a whole study on it along with flow charts and pie charts demonstrating how much good publicity they'd get and what that would have cost them in advertising.

You're "sure" about that, eh?

You think, or should I say "know," the "target" market for Apple computers is gays? Liberals? You think supporting gay rights is going to increase their sales? I'm sure that's why there are so many politicians/corporations speaking out for gay rights. And of course it's mostly gays and liberals using Google and their sponsors' products .... again.

[Hcheh]

http://news.cnet.com/Google-to-censor-Chin..._3-6030784.html

[Guest American Woman]

http://news.cnet.com/Google-to-censor-Chin..._3-6030784.html

There wasn't one thing in your link that said "Google doesn't have a problem helping the Chinese government arrest people who take a stand on important issues there." Nothing at all about Google helping the Chinese government arrest anyone. That statement, with nothing to back it up, is nothing but an outrageous, unfounded accusation.

[M.Dancer]

There wasn't one thing in your link that said "Google doesn't have a problem helping the Chinese government arrest people who take a stand on important issues there." Nothing at all about Google helping the Chinese government arrest anyone. That statement, with nothing to back it up, is nothing but an outrageous, unfounded accusation.

Are they complying with the Chinese and still doing busines there?

Nuff said. They don't have a problem and they continue to operate.

[Hcheh]

There wasn't one thing in your link that said "Google doesn't have a problem helping the Chinese government arrest people who take a stand on important issues there." Nothing at all about Google helping the Chinese government arrest anyone. That statement, with nothing to back it up, is nothing but an outrageous, unfounded accusation.

Yeah, they are only fueling the Chinese propaganda machine

[Guest American Woman]

Are they complying with the Chinese and still doing busines there?

Nuff said. They don't have a problem and they continue to operate.

Was that the issue I asked for a link to?-- The allegation I asked for verification of? No, it wasn't, and I don't see it forthcoming. Nuff said.

[Mortui]

Are they complying with the Chinese and still doing busines there?

Nuff said. They don't have a problem and they continue to operate.

Are you serious? Allowing the Chinese government to censor internet is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than helping them arrest activists in China. Come back when you have some brain cells for God's sake.

[M.Dancer]

Are you serious? Allowing the Chinese government to censor internet is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than helping them arrest activists in China. Come back when you have some brain cells for God's sake.

Tell that to Yahoo. To think that China doesn't use Google and Yahoo to spy on their activists is how you say, Pollyannish?

[Wild Bill]

Are you serious? Allowing the Chinese government to censor internet is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than helping them arrest activists in China. Come back when you have some brain cells for God's sake.

Completely different? Perhaps, but to those of us of a classic liberal political persuasion they're equally immoral!

Censorship of the media and jailing of political dissenters seem to go hand in hand...

[GostHacked]

Tell that to Yahoo. To think that China doesn't use Google and Yahoo to spy on their activists is how you say, Pollyannish?

To think it is not being used in the same capacity in the so called 'civilized world' is naieve as well. If you want to play in China, you have to (unfortunately) go with their rules. And it is not Google or Yahoo that will be bustiung you. It is the ISPs with their monitoring tools that will nail you.

Western main stream media is also censored for the most part. There are no investigative journalists working for MSM anymore. They have moved to blogs and stuff like that.

For example, the AT&T secret room.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060412-6585.html

The EFF's case against AT&T has barely begun, yet it has already brought to light some fascinating details about the methods behind the NSA's alleged wiretapping abilities. Mark Klein, a retired AT&T engineer who is now participating in the case as a witness, has released a statement to the media in which he outlines many of the allegations that are currently under seal. Chief among them is his claim that AT&T installed powerful traffic monitoring equipment in a "secret room" in their San Francisco switching office at the behest of the NSA.

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2006/04/70619

"Despite what we are hearing, and considering the public track record of this administration, I simply do not believe their claims that the NSA's spying program is really limited to foreign communications or is otherwise consistent with the NSA's charter or with FISA," Klein's wrote. "And unlike the controversy over targeted wiretaps of individuals' phone calls, this potential spying appears to be applied wholesale to all sorts of internet communications of countless citizens."

It seems in China they are telling you they are doing it up front. And for what it is worth, the rest of the so called civilized world, it is done secretively. What would you be more scared of?

[M.Dancer]

To think it is not being used in the same capacity in the so called 'civilized world' is naieve as well. If you want to play in China, you have to (unfortunately) go with their rules. And it is not Google or Yahoo that will be bustiung you. It is the ISPs with their monitoring tools that will nail you.

There is a world of difference between being imprisoned for wanting an open democratic China and child porn...keep digging

Western main stream media is also censored for the most part.

Your tin foil is past the best before date.

There are no investigative journalists working for MSM anymore. They have moved to blogs and stuff like that.

You mean like Symour Hersh? Abraham Hyatt? Greg Palast? Bob Woodward? Michael Isikoff? Christie Blatchford? Gillian Findlay? Anne Shortell? Victor Malarek?

Gee I guess you are right, there are NO investigative journalists working anymore for MSM.

It seems in China they are telling you they are doing it up front. And for what it is worth, the rest of the so called civilized world, it is done secretively. What would you be more scared of?

Governments who arrest people for thought crimes rather than real crimes and the tinfoil brigade who apologise for them.

[GostHacked]

There is a world of difference between being imprisoned for wanting an open democratic China and child porn...keep digging

Your tin foil is past the best before date.

Yes there is a difference. I am not saying either is right, but if change is going to happen to China, it will come from within. Any company that wants to do business in China will have to abide by their rules. It is as simple as that. Is it right? Maybe not. But that is the reality of it. Being realistic is not the same as being apologetic.

You mean like Symour Hersh? Abraham Hyatt? Greg Palast? Bob Woodward? Michael Isikoff? Christie Blatchford? Gillian Findlay? Anne Shortell? Victor Malarek?

Ok, there are a few left. But for the most part I am correct. MSM is like CNN, Fox, CBC, CTV... if you want to get to the real stuff, you hit the shows that are not popular but are in depth. And because of our ADD society, after a couple minutes of in depth analysis most people will just shut their ears off.

Governments who arrest people for thought crimes rather than real crimes and the tinfoil brigade who apologise for them.

My post is not an apology, but reflects the reality of how this Internet technology is monitored.

[White Doors]

You don't think Child Porn should be illegal?

[GostHacked]

You don't think Child Porn should be illegal?

As I said, neither is right. So here in the wester world, I do agree that child porn should remain illegal. Hope that clears things up for you. We don't jail dessenters in the US or Canada. But we are not China, they have their own rules. Again, does it make it right? No, but again, it is the reality of it.

Here let me quote myself

Yes there is a difference. I am not saying either is right, but if change is going to happen to China, it will come from within.

[M.Dancer]

Ok, there are a few left. But for the most part I am correct. MSM is like CNN, Fox, CBC, CTV... if you want to get to the real stuff, you hit the shows that are not popular but are in depth.

You should probably spend less time in front of a TV and instead open up a newspaper and you will quickly see that for the most part you're wrong.

[GostHacked]

You should probably spend less time in front of a TV and instead open up a newspaper and you will quickly see that for the most part you're wrong.

I spent most of my time in front of a computer. So I read some of those newspapers online. You gotta choose what to read and watch. There is so much out there, that it is quite an effort to sift through it to get the big picture you are looking for.

But you are correct, I should read more of the newspaper types.

[marksman]

Of course, Google doesn't have a problem helping the Chinese government arrest people who take a stand on important issues there.

Are you really so naive as to believe Apple and Google give a crap about gay rights? They don't care about anything but profits. If they're taking a stand it's because their PR departments have suggested this would be popular among selected target markets and make them seem like modern, cutting edge, etc. etc. I'm sure there was a whole study on it along with flow charts and pie charts demonstrating how much good publicity they'd get and what that would have cost them in advertising.

Are you really so naive to believe that all companies are evil and only concerned with money? It's their primary concern otherwise they wouldn't be in business but that doesn't mean there aren't actual people in those companies that might feel they can use their positions to support causes they believe in. I'm sure they know most of their customers won't abandon them because of their support but that doesn't mean they're doing it just to make profit. Sometimes companies just do this stuff for the pr but sometimes that pr is a bonus and the primary goal was to give their support to a cause.

Either way their motivation doesn't really matter. The 1st post was saying it's good to see companies taking positions on controversial issues. Why they do it doesn't matter since the point was only about the fact that they did do it.

[Kitch]

You should probably spend less time in front of a TV and instead open up a newspaper and you will quickly see that for the most part you're wrong.

Newspapers aren't 'filtered'?

Sorry, off topic.

[Kitch]

Are you really so naive to believe that all companies are evil and only concerned with money? It's their primary concern otherwise they wouldn't be in business but that doesn't mean there aren't actual people in those companies that might feel they can use their positions to support causes they believe in. I'm sure they know most of their customers won't abandon them because of their support but that doesn't mean they're doing it just to make profit. Sometimes companies just do this stuff for the pr but sometimes that pr is a bonus and the primary goal was to give their support to a cause.

Either way their motivation doesn't really matter. The 1st post was saying it's good to see companies taking positions on controversial issues. Why they do it doesn't matter since the point was only about the fact that they did do it.

I was going to dispute what you said because I am very cynical of corporations too. But you make a good point.

[M.Dancer]

Newspapers aren't 'filtered'?

Sorry, off topic.

You mean the newsprint?

I don't know what that means or what you are refering to.

[Kitch]

You mean the newsprint?

I don't know what that means or what you are refering to.

The other guy said something about the 'MSM' being certain TV stations and you told him that he should read newspapers more. I assumed this meant you were saying that newspapers are... better sources of news. So I asked you whether or not newspapers were 'filtered'... meaning that they selectively choose information and angles just as TV networks do.

[M.Dancer]

... meaning that they selectively choose information and angles just as TV networks do.

Of course they do. They sift between the relevant and the irrelevant, the interesting and the boring. That's the first job of an editor. But newspapers tend to be much more indepth and longer than the average 6 PM news piece.

And that is not what is commonly called censorship