I read an amazing piece a couple years back on how the largest tech companies essentially run a lot like political campaigns. I haven't been able to find it again, but the gist is something like...
I read an amazing piece a couple years back on how the largest tech companies essentially run a lot like political campaigns. I haven't been able to find it again, but the gist is something like this:
The large tech companies Microsoft, Apple, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and so on benefit strongly from platform regulation and the DMCA system: they're publishers but aren't held to account for what's on their platforms that users contribute. Then there's also the whole issue of software patents.
That's a wacky system is worth a lot of money, but only as long as everyone's on your side. Get negative attention, and the regulation will likely change.
So. You have to get politicians on your side to keep regulation as it is. That's why these companies are spending huge amounts on lobbying.
But, you also need the public to be on your side. How much of a raw, rent-seeking, margin-hunting capitalist can you be while maintaining a good enough public image to be left alone? That's where the philanthropy comes into the picture.
Philanthropy seems to be a very efficient investment. Compared to other marketing, the bang for the buck is extreme.
But Amazon's really pushing it with the conditions for their workers. I'd guess moreso than many of the other big names in the industry. That's also due to their reliance of lower-income labor in western countries. It's much easier to forget the shitty factory conditions behind phones, computers and stuff made in Asia than low income workers in the West.
Already back when I read that article a couple years back, the question was whether Amazon had pushed things too far. It seems they've been able to get away with even more since then, judging by the news stories.
I think I may have read that article as well, or a variant of it. I don't think anything will change as long as consumers are happy, and more than willing, to put convenience over ethical...
I think I may have read that article as well, or a variant of it.
I don't think anything will change as long as consumers are happy, and more than willing, to put convenience over ethical considerations. People will gloss over all manner of moral and ethical outrages if they can save a few dollars and get something they don't truly need delivered to their doorstep.
I read an amazing piece a couple years back on how the largest tech companies essentially run a lot like political campaigns. I haven't been able to find it again, but the gist is something like this:
The large tech companies Microsoft, Apple, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and so on benefit strongly from platform regulation and the DMCA system: they're publishers but aren't held to account for what's on their platforms that users contribute. Then there's also the whole issue of software patents.
That's a wacky system is worth a lot of money, but only as long as everyone's on your side. Get negative attention, and the regulation will likely change.
So. You have to get politicians on your side to keep regulation as it is. That's why these companies are spending huge amounts on lobbying.
But, you also need the public to be on your side. How much of a raw, rent-seeking, margin-hunting capitalist can you be while maintaining a good enough public image to be left alone? That's where the philanthropy comes into the picture.
Philanthropy seems to be a very efficient investment. Compared to other marketing, the bang for the buck is extreme.
But Amazon's really pushing it with the conditions for their workers. I'd guess moreso than many of the other big names in the industry. That's also due to their reliance of lower-income labor in western countries. It's much easier to forget the shitty factory conditions behind phones, computers and stuff made in Asia than low income workers in the West.
Already back when I read that article a couple years back, the question was whether Amazon had pushed things too far. It seems they've been able to get away with even more since then, judging by the news stories.
Where does the line really go?
I think I may have read that article as well, or a variant of it.
I don't think anything will change as long as consumers are happy, and more than willing, to put convenience over ethical considerations. People will gloss over all manner of moral and ethical outrages if they can save a few dollars and get something they don't truly need delivered to their doorstep.