1883: Ethically Yours

[EllaMacFarlane]

Originally Posted by Electric Squirrel

Why? Why does accepting capitalism mean I have to accept oil pouting the earth? It really can't be regulated? Or are you pointing towards an example of a non capitalist nation like China?
I'm personally probably more of a socialist, but still, oil spills and fracking are hardly an unavoidable byproduct of capitalism.

I did mean the extreme capitalism in the U.S. I think the highly regulated social democracies in Scandinavia have it about right. But in the US it's really obscene. It's amazing that there are people that want to deregulate everything when there isn't enough regulation right now. Food companies are not even selling real food, and they don't even have to mark what they really put in their "food-like products". I know I'm all over the place here but I think the extreme capitalism is responsible for so much, like the effects of global warming that's costing so many lives every year, and people being sick of shit food and then not being able to get healthcare. I can't believe there isn't a full scale revolution against the responsible parties.

[Sashi]

Originally Posted by Czarveillance

If parents (like Keith as the parent of a 5-year old in Chemda's hypothetical question) know that freemium games exist to make money without regard for business ethics and that kids can be tricked into spending money on them, I don't see how iTunes "stole from you" if the parents didn't take the precaution of making sure their CC isn't linked to the iTunes account the kids are using AND don't have the password necessary to make the purchase. Why wait until after the kid spent the money before taking that step?

Or maybe I'm just cranky. Must...get...turkey.

WHOA WHOA BLAMING THE VICTIM.

[JSZilla]

Something everyone is missing. The most important question NO ONE is asking. What are these kids who are clearly the target demographic of the Candy Crunch Conspiracy behind 9/11....What were they wearing while being victimized? Troy And Abed In The Morning..may have the only answer to this.

[Scumhook]

Originally Posted by JSZilla

What were they wearing while being victimized?

I may or may not have some upskirt pics of the kids while I was victimising them who were being victimised.

PM me so I can report you to the FBI and get you V& for details.

[Alekseyev]

Honestly I'm pretty surprised at Chemda's position on the marketing issue. I think everyone here would agree Chemda herself is a pretty successful marketer (points to the KATG empire we're all here posting in). Whether she would articular it or not I'd argue a large degree of KATG's success is when they advertise a new product the audience knows its not bullshit.

When there's a new KATG release they use all the tools at their disposal, the show, social media, email list, etc. to promote what it is and how great it is. But at no point are they selling something its not and the product doesn't have some kind of paywall trigger where even after you get it you're suddenly and unexpectedly confronted with having to pay more for what you were promised on the initial purchase. Compare this to what Keith is talking about which is intentionally misleading the consumer about what kind of transactions they are engaging in or tricking them into being unaware a transaction is taking place at all.

This doesn't cover the sobriety token bar thing, which isn't misleading just encouraging self destruction which is sick but I agree with Chemda the responsibility is mainly with the drinker, or the marketing to kids thing which I am torn on since parents should be responsible with their kids technology but also aware that they cant be watched 24/7 and that these companies are unquestionably targeting kids who don't know better. Ideally parents would not be using their phone games to pacify their children but legislating that would be a nightmare.

[theycallmepyro]

Chemda sounds libertarian to me - advocacy of personal responsibility and the freedom to make money without worrying about how the methods affect the consumer.

I find myself leaning slightly left of libertarian - most people should be able to take responsibility for themselves, but where kids or vulnerable adults (and that includes alcoholics) are involved, there should be rules in place to prevent exploitation for profit. The commercial asking kids to hold their phone up to the TV would not fly here in the UK, but I fear it may only be a matter of time.

(I realise it may come across as condescending to suggest alcoholics are as suggestible as children, but my point - for the sake of brevity - is that some people are just looking for an excuse.)

[Sashi]

Honestly, it sounded like Chemda was trying to justify what she and people in her circle of friends do because she's self conscious about being forced to do marketing. Meanwhile, she doesn't do anything remotely close to what these companies do. Please recognize that there's a difference between what you guys do and what these evil companies are doing, Chemda!

[BlackhatGuy]

I'm on team Chemda for this dumb app argument.

[Keith]

You would be.

[Czarveillance]

Originally Posted by Sashi

WHOA WHOA BLAMING THE VICTIM.

Depends on what you mean by "victim". I don't think there is a victim in this case. If you're not actively monitoring your children's use of technology and preemptively safeguarding your own money then you would have no one else to blame but yourself. If you have to assign the label "victim" to something then I guess you would have to say you made yourself the victim of your own carelessness.