“There Greenpeace goes again,” Arik Hesseldahl writes for BusinessWeek. “First it was the Mac. Now it’s the iPhone. I’ve harrumphed before, in this column and in my blog, about Greenpeace’s flawed attacks on Apple for using certain toxic chemicals in its computers. And now I’m ready to harrumph anew.”
“It’s not that Apple’s environmental conscience should be entirely clean. The company is in no better shape than other major computer makers when it comes to the use of these chemicals. Yet while it’s not an excuse, Apple sells just a fraction of the number of computers sold by Dell and Hewlett-Packard, both of which draw less consistent ire from Greenpeace,” Hesseldahl writes.
“It’s clear why Greenpeace picks on Apple so incessantly: The unique place that Apple and its chief executive officer, Steve Jobs occupy within popular culture and the technology industry make them both convenient whipping boys for publicity-hungry environmental organizations. Calling out Apple over environmental issues simply gets more headlines than criticizing HP would,” Hesseldahl writes.
“And Apple makes an especially juicy target when you consider that its branding and identity tend to overlap with so many cultural touchstones that the modern, left-leaning consumer is likely to consider important. Demographically speaking, Mac users are more likely to care about global warming, deforestation, and other environmental issues than your average Windows user. They’re also more likely to respond to one of Greenpeace’s calls to write letters, send e-mail, and show up at shareholder meetings to lobby for whatever the organization is up in arms about at any given moment. And having Al Gore, a freshly-minted Nobel laureate, on its board of directors also sends a strong message about how Apple wants to be perceived on the environmental front,” Hesseldahl writes.
Much more in the full article here.
@opie –
If you could actually spell the words you’re trying to use I’d be more inclined to not think you’re not engaging in satire.
But, just in case you’re serious, you should note that the Republicans of Abe Lincoln and Ike are not the same as the Republicans of Tricky Dick Nixon, Ronald Reagan and George Bush. And the Democrats of the 1870’s (a bunch of backwards southern hicks) are not the Democrats of FDR and JFK and Bill Clinton. The backwards southern hicks all went Republican when the Democrats backet the civil rights movement in the 1960s.
Lurker
There weren’t enough Democrats to get the civil rights bill passed. It took help from the Republicans.
Look at the percent of party votes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964
And Ronald Reagan WAS in the same mold as Lincoln.
More dis-info from the left.
The writer of propaganda on the board should be fired, as it has been shown by a British court that the man’s book has major untruths in it, and so schools in the U.K are not to use it without pointing out the lies in it.
As an Apple shareholder, I would feel much more comfortable if Al jumped off the board and ran for president. BTW, in the Canadian legal system, Greenpeace would have to pay court costs for both parties in a civil suit if it lost its case, but it appears there is no downside in the U.S. for launching frivolous suits.
Greenpeace = Ecoterrorism
Throw the bums out!
My dolphin pancakes taste snappier this morning.
Anyone who cites World Nutcase Daily as some kind of objective source needs to be regarded with a great deal of skepticism.
And as much as the right loves to fetishize Reagan, he was NOT in the mold of Lincoln.
Can we get back to talking about Macs, please?
@TowerTone –
You confirm my hypothesis. Prior to the passage of the Civil Rights Act, the Republican Party was capable of working for the greater good of individual citizens. After Tricky Dick and Reagan infected the party with the lust for power above all else, they used implicit racism (we’re NOT Democrats) to attract the disaffected Dixiecrats to the Republican Party and made enough hollow promises to them to get them to vote against their economic interests and bring the Republican party to power.
If you think Regan was cut from the same cloth as Lincoln, you need to read and think while you’re not sipping the kool-aid. Regan only stands our as a beacon when viewed from the shadows of the Bush administration. Reagan was just a good actor who could stand where he was told and stick to the script.
I’ve cancelled my annual Greenpeace subscription as a result of the Apple-bashing. Money goes to Amnesty now.
I assume by the message traffic that everyone belongs to PETA?
People Eating Tasty Animals.
Hey, save the planet by polluting, chain-sawing all the trees, and filling the air with smog so thick you could cut it with a dull butter knife. Reason- all the people will die, animals, and it can start a new life in a million years with clear blue skies and water.
Other wise it is not: save the planet, but save the people that depend on this planet…. Greenpeace is ass backwards!
Lurker
Hypothesis it is.
Truth it is not.
Those are some silly rationalizations.
@lurker
Never said they (the Republicans) were the same just thought it was interesting reading that should be mandatory. Did you know that a tigers skin is also striped? Makes sense to me that a leopard can never ever really changes it’s spots. As Col. Klink would say, “Very, very interesting.” As far as the Dems they are not the same. They are a little too socialistic for my taste. Kind of like MicroSoft. It doesn’t work and it will never change
@lurker: “…greater good of individual citizens…” is an oxymoron.
Of course, Reagan was no Lincoln — but George Bush is.
EARTH FIRST!
we will strip mine the rest of the galaxy later…..
Now I need to get that ELFBAIT license plate for my H2…
amyhre,
You are exactly what’s wrong with this world. So hurry up and die already.
Great remarks
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
As you know, these are open forums, you’re able to come and listen to what I have to say.
–George w. Bush
Washington, DC
10/28/2003