Dont Be Evil  
 Don't Be Evil - restoring the public trust in business, politics and the media   
 
    
« Home

Email Contact

comments at dontbeevil dot com

Posts

Brin - the principled approach makes more sense
Censorship and moral equivalence
Steve Ballmer on Don't Be Evil
Lauren Weinstein on "Don't Be Evil"
Uncensored Google.com serves 99% of China queries
What does Vint Cerf think about censorship?
Did Google Hire Stratfor for Counterprotest Work?
Not just morally repugnant
Don't be hypocritical
What lies in our power not to do
 
     Archives
04/25/04 05/02/04 05/09/04 05/16/04 05/23/04 05/30/04 06/13/04 07/04/04 07/11/04 08/08/04 11/07/04 12/05/04 04/17/05 04/24/05 05/01/05 05/08/05 05/15/05 06/12/05 06/26/05 07/10/05 07/17/05 07/24/05 07/31/05 08/07/05 08/28/05 09/18/05 09/25/05 10/09/05 11/13/05 12/04/05 01/15/06 01/22/06 01/29/06 02/05/06 02/12/06 03/12/06 04/02/06 04/09/06 04/16/06 04/23/06 04/30/06 05/07/06 05/14/06 05/21/06 06/04/06
 
     Links
Poynter Google's Ten Things Conflict of Interest


Google proposes software code of conduct - 5/20/2004 06:48:00 AM

Recognizing the proliferation of deceptive, fraudlent, and "junk" software, Google announced a new code of conduct for software developers.

From Google's announcement:

We're alarmed by what we believe is a growing disregard for your rights as computer users. We've seen increasing reports of spyware and other applications that trick you ... We do not see this trend reversing itself. In fact, it is getting worse.... we feel a responsibility to be proactive about these issues.

We believe software should not trick you into installing it....if the application makes money by showing you advertising, it should clearly and conspicuously explain this....It should be easy for you to figure out how to disable or delete an application....if an application collects or transmits your personal information such as your address, you should know....Getting paid to distribute undesirable software enables more undesirable software.


Spyware and deceptive applications aren't limited to the virus and hacker underground -- major companies like this one and this one are accused of promoting or supporting these practices.

Google has submitted the guidelines for public comment. You can send your feedback to software-principles@google.com.


Corporations -- clinically insane? - 5/18/2004 09:58:00 AM

The Economist reviews the anti-corporate film from Canada, The Corporation. The article, titled The Lunatic you Work For (sub req'd), begins:

To the anti-globalisers, the corporation is a devilish instrument of environmental destruction, class oppression and imperial conquest. But is it also pathologically insane?

Corporations are entitled to the rights of a person under U.S. law. This legal fiction has helped the corporate entity "the freedom to flourish."

So if the corporation is a person, ... what sort of person is it? ... The corporation is a psychopath.

Like all psychopaths, the firm is singularly self-interested: its purpose is to create wealth for its shareholders. And, like all psychopaths, the firm is irresponsible, because it puts others at risk to satisfy its profit-maximising goal, harming employees and customers, and damaging the environment. The corporation manipulates everything. It is grandiose, always insisting that it is the best, or number one. It has no empathy, refuses to accept responsibility for its actions and feels no remorse. It relates to others only superficially, via make-believe versions of itself manufactured by public-relations consultants and marketing men. In short, if the metaphor of the firm as person is a valid one, then the corporation is clinically insane.


The film argues that it's not because bad people run big companies -- but that "through their psychopathic pursuit of profit, firms make good people do bad things." People do evil things in their corporate personas that they would never do in their private lives:

Human values and morality survive the onslaught of corporate pathology only via a carefully cultivated schizophrenia: the tobacco boss goes home, hugs his kids and feels a little less bad about spreading cancer. Company executives and foot soldiers alike will identify instantly with this analysis, because it is accurate.

The article argues that, while accurate, this picture is "incomplete." The "company-as-psychopath idea" actually originated with Max Weber a century ago:

Bureaucracies have flourished because their efficient and rational division and application of labour is powerful. But a cost attends this power. As cogs in a larger, purposeful machine, people become alienated from the traditional morals that guide human relationships as they pursue the goal of the collective organisation. There is, in Weber's famous phrase, a “parcelling-out of the soul”.

While we call the machinations of corporations "evil," their misdeeds pale in comparison to the Evils of more sinister bureaucracies -- "the psychopathic national socialism of Nazi Germany, communism of Stalinist Soviet rule and fascism of imperial Japan ... Infinitely more powerful than firms and far less accountable for its actions, the modern state has the capacity to behave even in evolved western democracies as a more dangerous psychopath than any corporation can ever hope to become."

The Economist review says the makers of The Corporation (and by extension, the anti-capitalist movement), have a "misty-eyed alignment of the state with the public interest. Run that one past the people of, say, North Korea."

The movie is based on the book The Corporation : The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power by Joel Bakan. The book explores the thesis that the corporate system cannot last because it is "a system programmed to exploit others for profit."


Fahrenheit 9/11 kudos in Cannes - 5/17/2004 11:48:00 AM

The controversial documentary by Michael Moore reportedly opened to a 20-minute standing ovation at the Cannes Film Festival today.

According to a BBC review, the film attacks President George Bush as a "fraudulent and possibly corrupt president who went to war in Iraq because of a half-baked motivation of grudge, greed and thirst for power."

The BBC adds that "this is a Michael Moore film and, while that does not mean he is wrong, it must be watched with a critical eye."

Michael Moore has accused the White House of pressuring film companies not to release the film before the November election.

Disney prohibited its Miramax subsidary from distributing the film in the United States. This has raised questions of media censorship and the dangers of consolidating media into the hands of a few large corporations. See original post here, and a comparison of the ethics of Disney and Sinclair here.

Disney and Miramax are reportedly nearing an agreement to allow Moore to find a new distributor for the film in the United States.


 dontbeevil.com