Apple Reeks Of Hypocrisy After Condemning Indiana Law

[AuH20]

That is pretty pathetic.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/03/apple-bashes-indiana-but-gladly-does-business-with-countries-that-execute-gays/

http://4-ps.googleusercontent.com/hk/9dO3E1tyAM9FEJoQjUgzLfLy1j/www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/575x529xapple-country-575x529.jpg.pagespeed.ic.wVp723Dqfm_yU8XReEkO.webp

[jmdrake]

Remember. Apple is the same company that force downloaded a U2 album on to people's iPhones that had two gay guys embracing on the cover. Just putting it out for free for those who wanted it wasn't good enough.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

iphones are for fools.

[jkr]

http://www.webmastergrade.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Android-VS-Apple.jpg
#fuckapple

[Weston White]

Oh there we are, that is the Apple we all know and are so proud of:


https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/4a/3c/d1/4a3cd1bda0f385666c449f7428081716.jpg

https://darrylthomas.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/foxconn2.jpg

http://media.cagle.com/34/2014/09/22/154055_600.jpg

Someplace in hell there is a place reserved for Apple execs and it is probably not too far away from the one awaiting W-almart and Costco Execs.

[Ender]

Someplace in hell there is a place reserved for Apple execs and it is probably not too far away from the one awaiting W-almart and Costco Execs.

The problem isn't Apple, Walmart or Costco. The problem is government over-regulation, the FED, fractionalization of money, no gold standard, and minimum wage

Take care of these items and watch everything change- and for the better.

[AuH20]

Remember. Apple is the same company that force downloaded a U2 album on to people's iPhones that had two gay guys embracing on the cover. Just putting it out for free for those who wanted it wasn't good enough.

Apple loves their cheap publicity stunts, but when it comes down to $$$ they shut up pretty quick.

[specsaregood]

Remember. Apple is the same company that force downloaded a U2 album on to people's iPhones that had two gay guys embracing on the cover. Just putting it out for free for those who wanted it wasn't good enough.

Same company that under the reign of jobs colluded with book publishers to illegally pricefix ebooks when amazon wanted to make them cheaper.
Same company that under the reign of jobs colluded with other employers illegally to create non-hire practices of employees to push down the wages of engineers.
Same company that under the reign of jobs killed apples philanthropic program.
The same company that purposefully bricked unlocked iphones.
and more I'm sure. that's just off the top of my head.


It seems they replaced one douchebag ceo with another or they just have an ingrained culture of douchebaggery.

[RonPaul4Prez2012]

I've been an apple enthusiast since 1994 before they were mainstream cool. I'm still on board and I'm really enjoying my iPhone 6 among many other products. Cool company.

[helmuth_hubener]

I like Apple a lot. They make fantastic products at fantastic prices, they have the courage to truly innovate, and they treat their customers right. Steve Jobs built something special and unique at Apple, and I hope that the company is able to maintain that uniqueness for many decades to come. Apple does business everywhere. There's iPhones in Iran, and they want to sell (http://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-in-talks-to-sell-iphone-in-iran-1414604199) even more there, if the law ever lets them do so officially.

Three cheers for Apple! Thanks, Steve, for all you did. You pushed the human race forward. We miss you.

[juleswin]

Remember. Apple is the same company that force downloaded a U2 album on to people's iPhones that had two gay guys embracing on the cover. Just putting it out for free for those who wanted it wasn't good enough.

Are you talking about the "songs of innocence" album? if yes, then they didn't force you to download it. It was uploaded onto your phone to listen to and given 30 days or so to download or it disappeared. Also the cover art was not 2 people embracing. It was just a vinyl record with the name of the album written on it. I have an apple phone and I downloaded all the songs from the album. No gay people embracing, no forced download.

Now if you are talking about a different U2 album, them ignore this and carry on.

[helmuth_hubener]

As for the supposed "hypocrisy" "reeking" from Apple: this was a simple statement of one man's opinion. Can the guy not have an opinion? I say he can.

Obviously there is no hypocrisy in the statement. Cook doubtless does not approve of many laws, in many places.

He stated an opinion. Big deal. Let me state my opinion: I disagree and think the law is good from a libertarian perspective. So there's my opinion. Big deal. CEOs are allowed to have opinions, just like other human beings. As for Apple the company, Apple still does business in Indiana, is not making any threats to stop doing business in Indiana, and has not issued any official press releases nor statements condemning Indiana. Apple is happy to do business in Indiana, just as they'd be happy to do business in Iran. Or anywhere.

Personally, I would save your outrage for some target that actually deserves it.

[Cabal]

He's an American sharing his opinion on a matter concerning American politics. Where's the hypocrisy? How does Apple selling products indiscriminately make him a hypocrite? It seems to me if he were to discriminate about who or where Apple did business, that would be hypocrisy, given that he's taking issue with discrimination.

Also, "attacking Indiana?" Lol. If he's attacking anything, he's attacking a particular piece of legislation, or perhaps what he considers to be a widely held perspective regarding discrimination against gays. He isn't addressing Indiana exclusively, anyway. He specifically says "states across the country," and he also mentions Arkansas.

I'm not even particularly a fan of Apple, and I also don't think anyone should necessarily be forced to do business with those who they don't want to do business with, but this article is laughable.

[AuH20]

He's an American sharing his opinion on a matter concerning American politics. Where's the hypocrisy? How does Apple selling products indiscriminately make him a hypocrite? It seems to me if he were to discriminate about who or where Apple did business, that would be hypocrisy, given that he's taking issue with discrimination.

Also, "attacking Indiana?" Lol. If he's attacking anything, he's attacking a particular piece of legislation, or perhaps what he considers to be a widely held perspective regarding discrimination against gays. He isn't addressing Indiana exclusively, anyway. He specifically says "states across the country," and he also mentions Arkansas.

I'm not even particularly a fan of Apple, and I also don't think anyone should necessarily be forced to do business with those who they don't want to do business with, but this article is laughable.

If I was Tim Cook and supposedly a warrior for LGBT rights as he attests, then I would make sure I wasn't throwing rocks through glass windows. He's worried about Indiana, when gays get carved up in his client's countries on a regular basis?

I have no problem with an individual being a full spectrum advocate, but this type of stuff makes you chuckle when you examine it at face value. He actually cited the law as 'dangerous.' I mean, give me a break. Potentially losing my hand to a machete due to my sexual proclivities is dangerous. Not getting a wedding cake from someone who hates me? Not so much. More artificial first world problems being disingenuously promoted.

[helmuth_hubener]

If I was Tim Cook and supposedly a warrior for LGBT rights as he attests Oh, umm, did he "attest" that? Source?


then I would make sure I wasn't throwing rocks through glass windows. What, exactly, do you see as Mr. Cook's "glass windows"? He tweeted that he didn't like these right-to-deny-service legislations. So, his "glass windows" would be.. what? Has Cook been passing right-to-deny-service legislation lately?

Or perhaps he did so secretly, sometime in his distant past!

Do some digging and see what you can find.

You disagree with Cook. So do I. Great. So you posted this critical silly-piece, accompanied by some strong and unfounded rhetoric in your thread title. Various other posters came in to favor us with their various other, unrelated, poorly-articulated reasons why they hate Apple the company. And that's probably the direction the thread will go. But the bottom line for you is you agree with the right to refuse service, and this criticism you've latched onto is really a stretch and not likely to persuade anyone to your way of thinking, anyway. Just argue the issue, on its merits. Don't try to pretend that some CEO that disagrees with you is somehow an evil, reeking hypocrite, or that his company is, as if that somehow strengthens your position.

[Cabal]

If I was Tim Cook and supposedly a warrior for LGBT rights as he attests, then I would make sure I wasn't throwing rocks through glass windows. He's worried about Indiana, when gays get carved up in Africa on a regular basis?

I know who he is. Are you making the assumption he doesn't care about gays in other parts of the world? ...Why? Because he didn't mention that in those tweets? Are you suggesting he's perfectly fine with the execution of gays for being gay in other parts of the world? Are you suggesting that he should not be concerned with things that he's clearly concerned about in his own country because worse things are happening elsewhere? Are you suggesting that if he wants to discuss discrimination within the context of American politics, he must also discuss discrimination comprehensively, around the world? Really, what point are you trying to make here?

If Apple were to stop selling to Indiana residents because of this legislation, then you might have a point, and your criticism of hypocrisy might actually make sense, but that isn't the case.

[AuH20]

I know who he is. Are you making the assumption he doesn't care about gays in other parts of the world? ...Why? Because he didn't mention that in those tweets? Are you suggesting he's perfectly fine with the execution of gays for being gay in other parts of the world? Are you suggesting that he should not be concerned with things that he's clearly concerned about in his own country because worse things are happening elsewhere? Are you suggesting that if he wants to discuss discrimination within the context of American politics, he must also discuss discrimination comprehensively, around the world? Really, what point are you trying to make here?

If Apple were to stop selling to Indiana residents because of this legislation, then you might have a point, and your criticism of hypocrisy might actually make sense, but that isn't the case.

I'm saying it's convenient to attack Indiana and not condemn gay related atrocities around the world since it fits the current narrative. You see the same cognitive dissonance when progressives attack Christians for their backward thinking but then ignore the extreme measures of their Muslim counterparts. Wrong is wrong in my eyes. You can't just selectively pick and choose. That's my major bone with so called LGBT advocates. They are weaselly cowards.

[Cabal]

I'm saying it's convenient to attack Indiana and not condemn gay related atrocities around the world. You see the same cognitive dissonance when progressives attack Christians for their backward thinking but ignore the extreme measures of their Muslim counterparts. Wrong is wrong in my eyes. You can't just selectively pick and choose. That's my major bone with so called LGBT advocates. They are weaselly cowards.

They aren't mutually exclusive. And it doesn't seem like a matter of convenience to me, but rather a matter of relevance, to mention nothing of the general limitations of a medium such as Twitter. What foreign countries do or don't do isn't especially relevant where domestic American politics is concerned. That he doesn't mention other forms of discrimination outside of discrimination against gays with relation to this particular issue is no more surprising than how he doesn't mention other forms of gay discrimination outside of the country. It's called being concise and on point, and it isn't indicative of anything beyond that, let alone any form of hypocrisy.

If wrong is wrong in your eyes, then surely you can see how someone who regards something as wrong will be inclined to express concern about it? That you evidently expect him to comment on every wrong in the entirety of the world if he wants to express an opinion about a particular wrong, connected to a particular set of events is preposterous.

[jmdrake]

Are you talking about the "songs of innocence" album? if yes, then they didn't force you to download it. It was uploaded onto your phone to listen to and given 30 days or so to download or it disappeared. Also the cover art was not 2 people embracing. It was just a vinyl record with the name of the album written on it. I have an apple phone and I downloaded all the songs from the album. No gay people embracing, no forced download.

Now if you are talking about a different U2 album, them ignore this and carry on.

There is cover art for the album and cover art for the song.

Album.

http://www.macobserver.com/imgs/teaser_images/20140909u2songsofinnocence.jpg

Song.

http://s7.postimg.org/v10mt7aff/thereisalight.jpg

My ex wife called me freaking out asking if I had downloaded any music on her phone. This image was on her phone and my sons' phones. I informed her that I hadn't done squat to her phone in the year since the divorce. I did some research and found out that Apple had indeed pushed this album on people who didn't try to download it. After deleting the album the offensive image remained.

Months later the image was still there. She took them to the Sprint store to see if they could get the image off and the couldn't even after doing the required fix so now she and both my sons have Androids. Apple lost three loyal customers off of this stupid stunt.

Edit: And for the record she would have had pretty much the same reaction if it had been a man and a woman posed like that.

Edit 2: And you realize the "30 day" process you described is typically how malware works right? Most people had no idea what was going on. The clicked on the stupid album without realizing they were "opting in" to music and artwork they didn't want. That's why there was a backlash over this and Apple had to release an app to help people delete the crap.

http://globalnews.ca/news/1564397/apple-makes-it-easier-to-delete-u2-album-amid-anger-over-free-music/

[Ender]

They aren't mutually exclusive. And it doesn't seem like a matter of convenience to me, but rather a matter of relevance, to mention nothing of the general limitations of a medium such as Twitter. What foreign countries do or don't do isn't especially relevant where domestic American politics is concerned. That he doesn't mention other forms of discrimination outside of discrimination against gays with relation to this particular issue is no more surprising than how he doesn't mention other forms of gay discrimination outside of the country. It's called being concise and on point, and it isn't indicative of anything beyond that, let alone any form of hypocrisy.

If wrong is wrong in your eyes, then surely you can see how someone who regards something as wrong will be inclined to express concern about it? That you evidently expect him to comment on every wrong in the entirety of the world if he wants to express an opinion about a particular wrong, connected to a particular set of events is preposterous.

Beat me to it- and + rep.

[jmdrake]

They aren't mutually exclusive. And it doesn't seem like a matter of convenience to me, but rather a matter of relevance, to mention nothing of the general limitations of a medium such as Twitter. What foreign countries do or don't do isn't especially relevant where domestic American politics is concerned. That he doesn't mention other forms of discrimination outside of discrimination against gays with relation to this particular issue is no more surprising than how he doesn't mention other forms of gay discrimination outside of the country. It's called being concise and on point, and it isn't indicative of anything beyond that, let alone any form of hypocrisy.

If wrong is wrong in your eyes, then surely you can see how someone who regards something as wrong will be inclined to express concern about it? That you evidently expect him to comment on every wrong in the entirety of the world if he wants to express an opinion about a particular wrong, connected to a particular set of events is preposterous.

Would you say the same thing if in the 1980s someone criticized Ron Paul for being against the Civil Rights Act while being heavily invested in South Africa? Somehow I doubt it.

[PRB]

Oh there we are, that is the Apple we all know and are so proud of:


https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/4a/3c/d1/4a3cd1bda0f385666c449f7428081716.jpg

https://darrylthomas.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/foxconn2.jpg

http://media.cagle.com/34/2014/09/22/154055_600.jpg

Someplace in hell there is a place reserved for Apple execs and it is probably not too far away from the one awaiting W-almart and Costco Execs.

there's nothing wrong with using Chinese labor, they're cheap and nobody is forced to work there. they're allowed to quit.

[PRB]

could it simply be that they hold Americans to a higher standard because it's the country they operate in, HQ in, and do the most business in?

[jmdrake]

could it simply be that they hold Americans to a higher standard because it's the country they operate in, HQ in, and do the most business in?

Again. Would that fly if we were talking about a company invested in apartheid era South Africa?

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

there's nothing wrong with using Chinese labor, they're cheap and nobody is forced to work there. they're allowed to quit.


Again. Would that fly if we were talking about a company invested in apartheid era South Africa?





PRB and his liberal friends love a good cause. The cause doesn't really matter as long as there's a good soundtrack, lots of feminist guys, and the endorsement of a women's talk show.

[PRB]

Again. Would that fly if we were talking about a company invested in apartheid era South Africa?

Different people running the company at the time.

[heavenlyboy34]

iphones are for fools.


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to NorthCarolinaLiberty again.
as is all iCrap. Someone +rep this NCL fella^^

[idiom]

there's nothing wrong with using Chinese labor, they're cheap and nobody is forced to work there. they're allowed to quit.

Its cheap to manufacture there because you don't have to worry about environmental standards, among other things.

[PRB]

Its cheap to manufacture there because you don't have to worry about environmental standards, among other things.

Why should anybody care about the environment, that's a liberal issue. Libertarians want freedom, less government, and more money, environment is not our problem. Environment has always been the government's excuse to take away our rights.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Why should anybody care about the environment, that's a liberal issue.


Well, a liberal like you will care.




Libertarians want freedom, less government, and more money, environment is not our problem.

Nice straw man from someone who pretends to be libertarian.




Environment has always been the government's excuse to take away our rights.


No, you support such government. It's even in the Democratic Party's platform. Nice try, though.

[AuH20]

Why should anybody care about the environment, that's a liberal issue. Libertarians want freedom, less government, and more money, environment is not our problem. Environment has always been the government's excuse to take away our rights.

I care about the environment greatly, but I draw the line at AGW.

[Cabal]

Why should anybody care about the environment, that's a liberal issue. Libertarians want freedom, less government, and more money, environment is not our problem. Environment has always been the government's excuse to take away our rights.

Security has always been the State's excuse to infringe upon rights it has already assumed authority over by its mere existence, environmental issues where the State is concerned have only ever been extensions of appeals to security.

Anyway, environment is not a partisan issue. It's quite clearly a human issue. There's a reason we haven't been able to find any other planets that are habitable, and that reason is that we, as a species, require a very particular set of environmental conditions to survive and thrive. If you think an ideal libertarian society would disregard environmental issues, it seems to me you're very much mistaken.

[PRB]

I care about the environment greatly, but I draw the line at AGW.

AGW is not an environmental issue, if you think it is, you've bought into the liberal and hippie lies. Climate is what determines how much water and heat you'll have, crops, food costs...etc. F- the animals and trees, this affects you and people who you likely economically depend on.