The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
CEOs and political donations
Gazing
In My Restless DreamsRegistered User regular
In My Restless DreamsRegistered User regular
So this is a thing that happened:
http://variety.com/2016/biz/news/marvel-trump-ike-perlmutter-donation-1201692438/
So big time Marvel exec donates to Trump, shitatorm ensues. The argument has now been brought up (again) on the ethics of ramifications for moves such as this. Some want to keep personal and privet lives separate and so argue that there should be no ramifications for someone donating money to a political cause/figure. Others, however, view the position of the donor as an image on the company itself, especially when the numbers are in the seven+ figure range.
What is an acceptable response to something like this?
http://variety.com/2016/biz/news/marvel-trump-ike-perlmutter-donation-1201692438/
So big time Marvel exec donates to Trump, shitatorm ensues. The argument has now been brought up (again) on the ethics of ramifications for moves such as this. Some want to keep personal and privet lives separate and so argue that there should be no ramifications for someone donating money to a political cause/figure. Others, however, view the position of the donor as an image on the company itself, especially when the numbers are in the seven+ figure range.
What is an acceptable response to something like this?
0
Posts
I see the idea as firing someone because of what they do with their own money (Assuming it isn't illegal) as wrong. Companies aren't supposed to be able to enforce their morals on their employees through the threat of ruination. We shouldn't be telling bigots that we'll starve their children if they don't conform.
I know the starvation thing doesn't apply to someone making millions, but I'm also a true believer in the all persons are created equal mantra and so if firing a CEO for their personal beliefs is okay, then firing a waged employee for their personal beliefs should also be okay.
No one is suggesting a person suffer any ramifications simply for their beliefs. It's the actions that upset people.
Will it help trump? Will it help veterans? Will it help republicans? Will it hurt democrats? Will it hurt america? I don't know the answer to any of these questions
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Again, if it's not illegal, I'm not sure it's any of the company's business.
Considering the position of pro-life people and how they see abortion as murder, would you consider it wrong to fire someone for receiving an abortion?
Stop this. No one, at any point, said a company should fire anyone.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
donators will continue to donate
people at the company in question might have their lives disrupted a little (no matter how they personally feel about it, remember this is one dude out of hundreds or thousands)
it's silly to conflate the personal lives of anyone and the companies they work for. I'm looking at you too, Hobby Lobby
I disagree that boycott and social interaction never brings about change.
Like I said, that's the part that I object to. I guess I'm confused as to why you keep quoting me when the only part I've ever objected to is the firing.
But I still need to eat and read/watch something while I eat
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Because it wasn't originally firing. It was boycotting which would eventually probably result in firing.
The shallow level of action that internets typically do won't accomplish change on a deep structural level.
Sure stuff will change on a superficial level, as things constantly do, but nothing really major
It ain't going to tear down the sociopolitical and economic systems such that CEOs no longer donate money to things
I agree it won't fix everything forever. Small buy good change is still good change.
There isn't a meaningful difference between calling for the firing of a person and boycotting the company they work for until they resign.
You'd end up boycotting and the series most effected would probably be the more progressive and less shitty ones.
So when push comes to shove they can just cut niche comic X because why would anything negative happen to bigtitty heroine x since it's still selling just as well.
I dunno. Boycotts are interesting but they rarely seem to change anything at the top. Even if someone 'steps down' if you just check the board and advisor list like three months later you'll find em.
The bolded isn't a requirement. You're just assuming it is.
It is quite similar to the approach that the RIAA takes in singling out a vanishingly small number of people downloading music and destroying them financially. It has no real effect on the amount of people pirating music. The individuals who are selected to be made examples of are, of course, severely impacted, but the larger issue of piracy isn't touched.
It's an absolutely venomous approach to social change. Toxic and worthless.
Constantly addressing anyone and everyone on the internet that makes even the slightest attempt to affect society as "the internet rage machine" has gotten really annoying.
No one in this thread or the forum is suggesting death threats or whatever be sent.
I think that's probably a bad thing. But, as I understand it, it is pretty common for all sorts of employees. That being the case, and I feel it really probably should not be, I don't really care if it happens to someone who makes tons of money and is performing speech I disagree with, and who will likely suffer little.
I agree it ain't perfect.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
It would be a whole lot easier to have a discussion if you would speak plainly.
Do you agree that it's shitty for the internet to boycott Marvel because of this donation to charity?
If no, do you think that marvel should continue employing this person that most of us have never heard of until this morning because of this donation?
Are you boycotting Marvel over this? If you are not, how do you reconcile this with the below statement?
If y, on what conditions would you end your boycott of Marvel?
It's worse than not perfect
It's unhelping
boycotts don't actually send a coherent message
I see you here trying to set a particular bar for what constitutes the internet rage machine.
So it seems we do not agree on the bar, but we agree that the machine exists.
If money is speech, the usual caveats apply. You're beliefs and right to express them are protected, but you aren't protected from non-governmental consequences of your actions. So if he is fired because his views do not match with what the Marvel board of directors wants their company to be viewed as, then his ass is out.
In the case of firing for abortion, that's a medical procedure and in a perfect world that didn't have "Right to Work" states, that would be legally protected from retaliation.
I think it's perfectly okay for persons to avoid buying products from a person who willingly supports open bigots.
I know you want this thread to be about the internet hate machine but it's not.
Can't boycott comics what I wasn't buying. And Perlmutter's influence was removed from Marvel Studios some time ago by Disney.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
do you think that marvel should continue employing this person that most of us have never heard of until this morning because of this donation?
Are you boycotting Marvel over this? If you are not, how do you reconcile this with the below statement?
If y, on what conditions would you end your boycott of Marvel?
Not that I'm calling for this guy to get fired, he donated a million to Trump great whatever, Trump has billions so this does nothing other than make him look like an assclown
well it's shit to fire a regular employee for political speech, but one of the reasons you pay a CEO the big bucks is because the position is political as much as it is about doing things, and of people getting fired for outspoken politics I'd have the least sympathy for CEOs and military officers in uniform
I think Perlmutter's performance as CEO and his effects on the company's profits should decide whether or not he continues there.
But they are frequently good.
This isn't DC we are talking about.
edited question for clarity. Is that a yes or a no? please speak plainly.
To further clarify: I am directly asking in a y/n whether or not you believe this man should be fired for making a charitable donation. I want to remove any ambiguity.
And I'd give the same answer. That you want there to be a simple yes or no answer doesn't change anything.
So that's a no
edit: which I agree with by the way (but if they want to hey, it's their business and I'd understand it)
Sure they do. "You're supporting bigotry so we're not buying your stuff." Bam. Message sent.
To tell you the truth I don't watch a bunch of movies nowadays. I haven't since Iron man. I go to movie spoiler and read em up after the hype dies down and save like 8 bucks every 3 or so months
Edit: also all the best scenes are on youtube
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
if you're going to take a moral stand and boycott marvel because the CEO is shitty well
I'd say your best bet is to move into the woods and live off the land, there are thousands and thousands of people who make money off each movie and I'm sure something like half of them have shitty beliefs, same with the company that made your cell phone for that matter
Hey I read my side of the mountain bring it
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I don't want to just say no since quite a few companies have various expectations of people that work there. Sometimes those expectations are fine and sometimes they're clearly overreaching.