We had a conversation here the other day about companies' responsibilities, with one reader suggesting that I was wrong to say that they need to embrace social responsibilities.
Another MNB reader chimed in:
May I suggest making ‘business decisions’ especially based on nothing more than making money for stockholders while ignoring larger social issues is quickly becoming a bona fide path to bankruptcy? Many in the younger generations are watching the social actions of companies and are opting with their dollars to go elsewhere when they determine a business has no social conscious or awareness.
Hard ‘It’s just business’ decisions that ignore the environment, fairness, etc. might play well now to the investment community but when sales start to fall because the public decides that business has no soul, the investment community will be quick to take their dollars elsewhere, too.
I agree. Completely.
But another MNB reader wrote, referring to our discussion of New Balance having to deal with an unwanted embrace by the white supremacist community (which was prompted by the company's apparent support for Trump's avowed trade predilections), wrote:
It's the business of a business to collect a consumer's money, no matter what his personal belief-system might be.
Disagree. There is such a thing as intelligent loss of business. One can't necessarily stop certain people from buying your products ... or reading your website. But one doesn't have to embrace these people, either.
Regarding another story, MNB reader Brian Blank wrote:
Regarding yesterday’s story on Facebook’s political influence, I recently saw a Twitter post (and I regret that I do not recall the author) that said something to the effect of “That awkward moment when Facebook tries to explain how they have no influence over politics, yet has enormous influence over consumer spending.”
For me, Facebook's claims of having no influence over politics rings hollow.
I argued yesterday that it is important to take seriously the concerns of the nonviolent protesters who are making themselves heard in recent days; I even commented that when I look back on growing up in the late sixties and early seventies, I wish I'd spent more time protesting, not less. But one MNB user wrote:
It could be argued that the reason so many people ended up on protest lines in the sixties and seventies had as much to do with drugs and boredom as anything else.
Ah. Spoken like someone who wants to minimize the opinions of people with whom you disagree, as opposed to taking them seriously.
From another reader:
It never ceases to amaze me how willing we are to squash other peoples rights when it won’t impact us..i.e. the unending cries from the right to A) “stop the protesting”, B) “give him a chance” or my personal favorite C) “respect the office of the president”.
First of all the VERY FIRST AMENDMENT is FREEDOM OF SPEECH, the right to assemble (peacefully – an important element to be sure). So re: “A)” If you disagree with people exercising their RIGHT to protest then you might want to examine your understanding of our republic. If you disagree simply because you disagree with their opinions THEN YOU REALLY need to go back and take an American history class.
Re “B) & C)” Don’t start trying to REWRITE HISTORY by telling me and anyone who will listen how warm and welcoming and respectful this country was when Obama took office and especially do not tell me the right was accepting of him when he tried to implement some of his desired policies. It will take about 15 seconds for anyone to Google racist signs and effigies of Obama to see how Obama was received and how he was respected. The pictures are chilling..and even more alarming given some of these same things are now being said again BECAUSE Trump won and credited as part of WHY he won.
I’ll give Trump his chance…I have high hopes for America, VERY VERY LOW EXPECTATIONS OF Mr. T though. I’m also going to tell the Right that if you think these protest are bad …you ain’t seen nothing yet…try overturning our right to assemble and protest…or start silencing the free press….that will (and should) raise holy hell in our streets.
Responding you Michael Sansolo's column yesterday, one MNB user wrote:
Regarding your article on MetLife’s discontinued use of Snoopy as its spokesperson, this millennial remembers "Peanuts" with a fierce fondness! Granted I didn’t spend much time reading the cartoons as a kid, but ask any of us born in the great state of Minnesota and we’ll all agree that the Camp Snoopy theme park at Mall of America was one of THE BEST childhood memories. Tossing a coin in Snoopy’s giant dog dish was a ritual for me every year-end field trip I can remember taking in elementary school. I even remember celebrating Charles Schultz’s birthday…
But, as it’s been pointed out, times change and to anyone not fortunate enough to have lived in the Land of 10,000 Lakes (only kidding!). "Peanuts" is not nearly as relevant anymore. I know they certainly aren’t to my younger cousins currently in middle school and entering high school who now know the theme park as Nickelodeon Universe (hand’s down, no comparison to its predecessor).
Snoopy and the gang will be affectionately remembered!
And finally, regarding the passing of Stater Bros.' Jack Brown, MNB reader Larry Ishii wrote:
I worked at Stater Bros during the early 80’s as Director GM/HBC. I felt comfortable with Jack from the start of my first interview with him. I started at Stater Bros just months after Jack did and I could tell right away what an amazing man he was. He touched so many and will be missed by all.
I was there through the proxy battle for control of the company and can vividly remember the great support for Jack and the “Brown-bo” t-shirts (Jack’s head on Stallone’s body) worn by union warehouse workers.
Working at Stater Bros was an amazing experience in my nearly fifty-year career in the grocery industry.
And, from MNB reader Chuck Wedge:
Being involved with Stater’s for 20 years, Jack Brown was a great American and Man!!! He will be missed!!!
Another MNB reader chimed in:
May I suggest making ‘business decisions’ especially based on nothing more than making money for stockholders while ignoring larger social issues is quickly becoming a bona fide path to bankruptcy? Many in the younger generations are watching the social actions of companies and are opting with their dollars to go elsewhere when they determine a business has no social conscious or awareness.
Hard ‘It’s just business’ decisions that ignore the environment, fairness, etc. might play well now to the investment community but when sales start to fall because the public decides that business has no soul, the investment community will be quick to take their dollars elsewhere, too.
I agree. Completely.
But another MNB reader wrote, referring to our discussion of New Balance having to deal with an unwanted embrace by the white supremacist community (which was prompted by the company's apparent support for Trump's avowed trade predilections), wrote:
It's the business of a business to collect a consumer's money, no matter what his personal belief-system might be.
Disagree. There is such a thing as intelligent loss of business. One can't necessarily stop certain people from buying your products ... or reading your website. But one doesn't have to embrace these people, either.
Regarding another story, MNB reader Brian Blank wrote:
Regarding yesterday’s story on Facebook’s political influence, I recently saw a Twitter post (and I regret that I do not recall the author) that said something to the effect of “That awkward moment when Facebook tries to explain how they have no influence over politics, yet has enormous influence over consumer spending.”
For me, Facebook's claims of having no influence over politics rings hollow.
I argued yesterday that it is important to take seriously the concerns of the nonviolent protesters who are making themselves heard in recent days; I even commented that when I look back on growing up in the late sixties and early seventies, I wish I'd spent more time protesting, not less. But one MNB user wrote:
It could be argued that the reason so many people ended up on protest lines in the sixties and seventies had as much to do with drugs and boredom as anything else.
Ah. Spoken like someone who wants to minimize the opinions of people with whom you disagree, as opposed to taking them seriously.
From another reader:
It never ceases to amaze me how willing we are to squash other peoples rights when it won’t impact us..i.e. the unending cries from the right to A) “stop the protesting”, B) “give him a chance” or my personal favorite C) “respect the office of the president”.
First of all the VERY FIRST AMENDMENT is FREEDOM OF SPEECH, the right to assemble (peacefully – an important element to be sure). So re: “A)” If you disagree with people exercising their RIGHT to protest then you might want to examine your understanding of our republic. If you disagree simply because you disagree with their opinions THEN YOU REALLY need to go back and take an American history class.
Re “B) & C)” Don’t start trying to REWRITE HISTORY by telling me and anyone who will listen how warm and welcoming and respectful this country was when Obama took office and especially do not tell me the right was accepting of him when he tried to implement some of his desired policies. It will take about 15 seconds for anyone to Google racist signs and effigies of Obama to see how Obama was received and how he was respected. The pictures are chilling..and even more alarming given some of these same things are now being said again BECAUSE Trump won and credited as part of WHY he won.
I’ll give Trump his chance…I have high hopes for America, VERY VERY LOW EXPECTATIONS OF Mr. T though. I’m also going to tell the Right that if you think these protest are bad …you ain’t seen nothing yet…try overturning our right to assemble and protest…or start silencing the free press….that will (and should) raise holy hell in our streets.
Responding you Michael Sansolo's column yesterday, one MNB user wrote:
Regarding your article on MetLife’s discontinued use of Snoopy as its spokesperson, this millennial remembers "Peanuts" with a fierce fondness! Granted I didn’t spend much time reading the cartoons as a kid, but ask any of us born in the great state of Minnesota and we’ll all agree that the Camp Snoopy theme park at Mall of America was one of THE BEST childhood memories. Tossing a coin in Snoopy’s giant dog dish was a ritual for me every year-end field trip I can remember taking in elementary school. I even remember celebrating Charles Schultz’s birthday…
But, as it’s been pointed out, times change and to anyone not fortunate enough to have lived in the Land of 10,000 Lakes (only kidding!). "Peanuts" is not nearly as relevant anymore. I know they certainly aren’t to my younger cousins currently in middle school and entering high school who now know the theme park as Nickelodeon Universe (hand’s down, no comparison to its predecessor).
Snoopy and the gang will be affectionately remembered!
And finally, regarding the passing of Stater Bros.' Jack Brown, MNB reader Larry Ishii wrote:
I worked at Stater Bros during the early 80’s as Director GM/HBC. I felt comfortable with Jack from the start of my first interview with him. I started at Stater Bros just months after Jack did and I could tell right away what an amazing man he was. He touched so many and will be missed by all.
I was there through the proxy battle for control of the company and can vividly remember the great support for Jack and the “Brown-bo” t-shirts (Jack’s head on Stallone’s body) worn by union warehouse workers.
Working at Stater Bros was an amazing experience in my nearly fifty-year career in the grocery industry.
And, from MNB reader Chuck Wedge:
Being involved with Stater’s for 20 years, Jack Brown was a great American and Man!!! He will be missed!!!
- KC's View:
