Re:Human Costs Are Built Into an iPad
by droithomme on Wednesday January 25, 2012 @10:11PM
(#3512749)
All right. Pretend the word Apple is replaced by "a client who wishes to remain anonymous". Is what is described in the article OK now and not newsworthy, or does the article describe disturbing things about labor practices that are intrinsically newsworthy?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Why single out the iPad?
A) page views
B) hedge funds trying to short AAPL by spreading negative news the day AFTER a record-breaking quarter.
C) A & B
Re:Human Costs Are Built Into an iPad
by droithomme on Wednesday January 25, 2012 @11:01PM
(#3512861)
Sure I understood that from your first post.
I am interested in your opinion about the larger issue. Is what is described in the article OK now and not newsworthy, or does the article describe disturbing things about labor practices that are intrinsically newsworthy?
No its not ok. But WHY single out the iPad?
Re:Human Costs Are Built Into an iPad
by nextparadigms on Wednesday January 25, 2012 @10:40PM
(#3512812)
D) Apple can have the biggest influence in Foxconn's work policies.
Wrong. The Chinese government does.
Ok, then Apple can have a larger impact in Foxconn's work policies than anyone else who is likely to be influenced by an article in the NY Times. I don't think the Chinese government especially cares about public opinion.
Apple, Samsung, Sony, Microsoft, Dell, HP, etc.
WHY single out Apple?