Briton wrote:

Pulvinar wrote:

Briton wrote:

Pulvinar wrote: No one seems to be considering what the Chinese workers would be doing if they weren't making these products. Is it OK if they have no factory job and just starve? At least it wouldn't be *us* abusing them, right?

We could cut their wages even lower than they are now and still make the same point, right?

If their alternative is even worse, then yes.

Then your point is meaningless. Of course any income is better than no income. That doesn't change the fact that Apple; the biggest company in the world that is billions of dollars profit, and their comparatively affluent 'followers', could either share a small portion of those humongous profits, or pay a little more to give those workers a better life.

Watch out you will be accused of frothing for that is apparently what you do when you criticise Apple.

I entirely agree with you. They could also easily set up factories in America and give work to their fellow Americans instead of exploiting the Chinese. Let the Chinese develop their own industries.

When is Apple with all that money going to set up the Apple Foundation?

NuclMan wrote:

felltoearth wrote:So, who's product do I buy? How do we change this?

Start by purchasing more products that say "Made in Canada or Made in USA", and be willing to pay more for them.

Shame people that choose not to.

Made in Britain you damn terrorists!

I don't really see an argument in keeping the jobs in China just so the Chinese have jobs. If that's the case, set up factories in Africa.

Nope, stop using a cheap workforce to make bigger profits and put the jobs in the US and give people there work with a decent wage/hours/benefits.

I bet if this programme was criticising any company other than apple, we wouldn't have anyone defending them. If there was an article about coca cola exploiting workers, would anyone say "why is no-one criticising Pepsi too?"

Maybe though my inquiry lies in the fact there is little alternative at the moment. Simply because Apple makes more profit off these practices doesn't absolve Ggogle et al. of the same sins. At lease with Coke and Pepsi there are alternatives for beverages, like local soft drink producers for example (I'm pretty sure Snapple is still produced in the states). Tablet computers, not so much.

I'm With Stupid wrote:I bet if this programme was criticising any company other than apple, we wouldn't have anyone defending them. If there was an article about coca cola exploiting workers, would anyone say "why is no-one criticising Pepsi too?"

A fairer comparison would be if it were not a single instance of criticism, but instead yet another verse of the familiar song "let's single out coca cola and ignore the rest". That might engender a bit of defense. You might see people wondering why the spotlight was so narrow.

To me it's very strange. For any serious journalist the real story should be that of working conditions of a massive contract manufacturer. To focus on one of its many clients rather misses the point.

It will be interesting to see what the press pursues. Will any investigative journalists try to find out and expose what the rest of Pegatron's manufacturing operation is like? Will they really care about exposing the extent of bad working condition problems at this huge manufacturer? Or will they ignore that and only go after the single Pegatron client Apple?

That will tell a lot.

I'm not trying to defend Apple or Absolve it. I'm saying the blame is currently being aimed at apple. Despite the fact the company actually doing the exploitation is Foxconn... and Apple is not it's only Client.

So I don't see how comparing it to Pepsi/Coke unless people were blaming coke for a chain of bottling subcontractors were abusing their employees and pepsi was also using that same sub contractor but not being mentioned.

DO we want Foxconn to stop abusing it's employee's? Then how about we get ALL the companies sub contracting them to pressure for change?

Or are we too entrenched to try that at this point?

orpheus wrote:

I'm With Stupid wrote:I bet if this programme was criticising any company other than apple, we wouldn't have anyone defending them. If there was an article about coca cola exploiting workers, would anyone say "why is no-one criticising Pepsi too?"

A fairer comparison would be if it were not a single instance of criticism, but instead yet another verse of the familiar song "let's single out coca cola and ignore the rest". That might engender a bit of defense. You might see people wondering why the spotlight was so narrow.

Has there really been a wave of anti-Apple articles? From. What I've seen, there was the original article criticising practices in their factories, and then this is the follow up to that.

You must NEVER criticise Apple.

The Emperor's frock is really quite lovely, don't you agree? You [MUST] agree.

Yes. Of course you agree.

We all agree.

It's not as if they're the only company to have this treatment. Primark were the last one I remember, with other companies using the same factory being a footnote in the article. Nike and Gap have had similar treatment in the past. The media tend to focus on a single high profile brand because that's what gets people's attention. Is anyone going to read a story about how bad Foxconn are? Who even knew who Foxconn were outside of the context of Apple products? The reality is that you create change by focusing on the companies that consumers know. Do you think BHP Billiton would give a shit about bad publicity? Of course not, they have no business with the general public. Now you.might have a point that it's unfair to target one of many companies that use the supplier, but it's simply not true to suggest that Apple are unique in their treatment.

I'd be more inclined to push for a living wage in the country where I live. As every company seems to follow the same practices it doesn't seem like there's much we can do, other than petition or not buy technology at all. That's not really an option for me.

I think Apple deserves fair criticism for their profit taking. The treatment of the workers in China is more a feature of capitalism than it is of electronics manufacturing.

Scot Dutchy wrote:SafeAsMilk

Try using the quote function properly before accusing anyone about pronunciation.

My use of the quote function is just fine. Figure out the basics of grammar, then you can come talk to me.

Your posts are just a word salad but what do we expect from someone that cant be bothered to look at the facts, the over pricing and exploitation that Apple carries out.

Thanks for yet another straw man, here's hoping that someday you'll grow a real argument I'm well aware of what Apple does. Try reading the thread if you want to address my actual position, if making an actual point isn't too difficult for you.

Good luck with your crappy over priced toys. "A fool and his money are easily parted".

Awww, poor baby throw bottle out of the pram! Still not going to back up any of your claims? No shock there!

Scot Dutchy wrote:
Watch out you will be accused of frothing for that is apparently what you do when you criticise Apple.

When you attack Apple, and only Apple, frothing like a wild dog while doing so? Yeah, you will, and rightly so. Maybe try backing up any of your claims, just for once? Or is mindless ranting all we'll see?

I entirely agree with you. They could also easily set up factories in America and give work to their fellow Americans instead of exploiting the Chinese. Let the Chinese develop their own industries.

Hey, great idea. When do I get to see you froth over any of the other companies doing exactly the same thing?

thaesofereode wrote:You must NEVER criticise Apple.

The Emperor's frock is really quite lovely, don't you agree? You [MUST] agree.

Yes. Of course you agree.

We all agree.

Congrats on following the trend! Original thinker here, everyone!

I LOVE it when Apple haters act exactly the same as the Apple lovers they hate. It's the step right before the predictable one where they decide that anyone who points out this hypocrisy must be an Apple fanboy

I'm With Stupid wrote:It's not as if they're the only company to have this treatment. Primark were the last one I remember, with other companies using the same factory being a footnote in the article. Nike and Gap have had similar treatment in the past. The media tend to focus on a single high profile brand because that's what gets people's attention.

Yeah, um...that's the point. Maybe if they'd focus on the actual problem instead of bringing focus to whatever's going to sell the most news, it might actually help. For now, all we've got is an excuse for gleeful haters to froth at the mouth and for the general public to think only a few big companies are doing this.

Is anyone going to read a story about how bad Foxconn are? Who even knew who Foxconn were outside of the context of Apple products?

I guess that means the media hasn't been doing a very good job of bringing Foxconn to people's attention then, huh? Ah well, I guess they can't be blamed for just doing what they need to do to sell the most news...

The reality is that you create change by focusing on the companies that consumers know.

If that's true, then why are we still seeing the same abuses after Primark, Gap and Nike?

Do you think BHP Billiton would give a shit about bad publicity? Of course not, they have no business with the general public. Now you.might have a point that it's unfair to target one of many companies that use the supplier, but it's simply not true to suggest that Apple are unique in their treatment.

There is an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to the criticisms of Apple. While they deserve the attention, you can't pretend that Apple doesn't get more attention than other companies doing the same thing.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

The reality is that you create change by focusing on the companies that consumers know.

If that's true, then why are we still seeing the same abuses after Primark, Gap and Nike?

Presumably because customers of Primark, Gap and Nike - and Apple too - don't give enough fucks about exploitation in the supply chain behind the shit they buy to force these companies to behave ethically.

ED209 wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:

The reality is that you create change by focusing on the companies that consumers know.

If that's true, then why are we still seeing the same abuses after Primark, Gap and Nike?

Presumably because customers of Primark, Gap and Nike - and Apple too - don't give enough fucks about exploitation in the supply chain behind the shit they buy to force these companies to behave ethically.

That, and I suspect, not feeling they have the power to force these companies to behave ethically. Companies will just continue hiding and exploiting people, and the news will throw out a few cases of "gotcha!" to make some people feel good about themselves before they get back to supporting all the other less headline-worthy companies who do the same thing.

I mean Wal-mart gets a lot of its clothes from slave labor, and a good chunk of people feel badly about it. But when they need a pair of jeans and competing prices are higher than Wal-Mart's brand the concept of exploitation is the furthest thing from the consumer's checkbook.

SafeAsMilk wrote:There is an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to the criticisms of Apple. While they deserve the attention, you can't pretend that Apple doesn't get more attention than other companies doing the same thing.

There there a whole Wikipedia page over the naughty Apple. Cant have that can we. Apple needs like all companies that exploit its workers as much exposure as possible. But ofcourse we are not allowed to criticise are we. Grow up FFS.

Your childish gibberish does not impress. Apple set itself up for criticism by claiming many false claims as was shown on a documentary that you admit yourself you have not even watched. Well done.

Who is frothing? I am not. I read and watch facts before shouting my mouth off and you should do the same.

^ Is the definition of frothing. It is also chalk full of strawmans since SafeasMilk never said we should not criticize apple or draw attention to it. Just that Apple is the brunt of a lot of objection that seems to stem from an irrational hatred of the company for no better reason than it is American. Now why is that Scot...no wait....already know the answer.