Harris Poll: Corporate reputations can become politically polarized

As companies wrestle with how to approach a divided U.S. political climate, new research from The Harris Poll shows that Americans view the reputations of some companies as aligned with their individual values. Republicans hold the reputations of Chick-fil-A and Hobby Lobby–companies that have vocally shared their conservative beliefs–significantly more favorably than Democrats do. Democrats perceive Target’s reputation more positively.

“In such divided times, as companies scurry to figure out if and how to respond to the issues and commentary of the new administration, we find that corporate reputation perceptions can be just as polarizing,” said Wendy Salomon, vice president of reputation management and public affairs at The Harris Poll, in a statement. “Companies that have taken very public stands for their beliefs are rewarded by consumers of similar conservative or liberal views, but there is also clear risk among those who feel otherwise.”

According to Harris Poll’s research, Chick-fil-A earns a higher reputation score among Republicans than any other company, scoring 17.4 points higher among Republicans (“excellent”) than among Democrats (“good”). Hobby Lobby also scores 17 points higher among Republicans (excellent” compared to “fair” among Democrats). Democrats score Target 11.8 points higher (“very good”) compared to Republicans (“fair”).

“Values play a bigger role than ever before in corporate reputation, and the business significance of a company’s reputation has never been higher,” said Mark J. Penn, managing partner and president of The Stagwell Group LLC, which owns The Harris Poll, in a statement. “Consumers are keenly interested in how companies engage with the world, and that includes corporate ideals. As the red versus blue duel of politics impacts corporate reputation, we expect to see more alignment along party beliefs.”

The Harris Poll Reputation Quotient, which identifies movement, trends and insights in a changing corporate reputation landscape, reveals reputation ratings for the 100 most visible companies in the U.S., as perceived by the general public. A trusted baseline for understanding and managing corporate reputation and identifying new market risks and opportunities, the RQ measures companies’ reputation strength based on the perceptions of more than 23,000 Americans across six corporate reputation dimensions: Social Responsibility, Emotional Appeal, Products and Services, Vision and Leadership, Financial Performance, and Workplace Environment. In this year’s study, 17 of the 100 most visible U.S. companies earned “excellent” reputation scores and 34 companies received “very good” scores. The Harris Poll 2017 Reputation Quotient Summary Report can be found at www.theharrispoll.com/reputation-quotient/.

The Harris Poll 2017 Reputation Quotient
Source: The Harris Poll

 
Vision and Leadership More Important Than Ever, Yet CEOs’ Reputations Failing
Harris Poll’s analysis shows that while Vision and Leadership attributes are increasingly important to reputation equity, an astounding half of Americans rate the reputations of today’s corporate leaders and CEOs as “bad.” Only one-quarter of the public rates CEOs with “good” reputations; 26 percent are neutral. Americans cite trusted, ethical and accountable as the most important traits for CEOs, while it is less important for business leaders to be curious, visible, bold and risk takers.

“Vision and Leadership impact a company’s reputational equity now more than it did ten years ago, meaning today’s CEOs and business leaders have a major reputation issue,” said Salomon. “It’s important that companies continue to find ways to demonstrate the value their vision for the future delivers, and how their team of leaders can make that vision a reality.”

Tesla Unobtainable for Many Yet Reputation High
Tesla Motors makes its RQ and top ten (#9) debuts with an “excellent” reputation rating, despite the fact that many Americans may never purchase one of its products – or even ride in one.

“Many companies with high reputations are fairly ubiquitous; you interact with them in your home, you shop at these stores and you use their services,” said Salomon. “What’s interesting about Tesla is that while Elon Musk undoubtedly brings a ‘celebrity CEO’ factor, it’s a company that isn’t accessible to most consumers. Given this strong reputational backdrop, and that Musk has the ear of the Trump administration, Tesla will be a fascinating company to watch moving forward.”

Highly Visible for the Wrong Reasons
The RQ study shows that Americans have a deeper knowledge of how companies behave with companies like Takata (massive airbag scandal) and Mylan (EpiPen pricing scandal) more visible due to reputational crises. This year marks the first time Takata and Mylan have appeared on the Most Visible Companies list, with “fair” (Mylan) and “critical” (Takata) ratings.

“Takata and Mylan are not household names, yet due to recent events, they are well known,” said Salomon. “It’s a clear indication of the level of understanding and engagement the public has in the granular details of crisis situations. Corporate behavior has become common dinner table conversation.”

Most Damaging Scenarios to Corporate Reputation
According to the RQ study, the biggest risks to corporate reputation are intentional wrongdoing or illegal actions by corporate leaders (cited by 85 percent of Americans), lying or misinterpreting the facts about a product or service (83%) and intentional misuse of financial information for financial gain (82%). Other risks to reputation damage include security or data breaches (74%), unfair workplace conditions and culture (67%), workplace discrimination (65%), product recall due to contamination (65%) and poor leadership conduct (64%).

When asked which company damaged their reputation the most this past year, most consumers cited Wells Fargo (23%), followed by Volkswagen (9%) and Samsung (5%).

“Incidents that introduce reputational risk are not created equal,” said Salomon. “Some crises that we’ve seen play out in the past few years cut at the core of what the public sees as most damaging, while other situations aren’t such a big deal. Reputation managers often face great internal and external pressures to respond, so the more they can understand the scale of response that makes sense the better.”

Amazon, Wells Fargo Make RQ History
Wells Fargo & Company, tainted by a fake accounts scandal, fell 20.6 points, surpassing Volkswagen’s 2016 decline (-20.5) as the largest drop in RQ’s 18-year history.

Amazon.com – claiming the top spot for the second consecutive year and marking the ninth consecutive year the online retailer has ranked in the top ten – recorded the highest rating (86.27) by any company during nearly two decades of RQ corporate reputation insights.

Driven by its product offerings and an emotional connection with consumers, Amazon.com is unsurpassed in four areas important to reputation – Emotional Appeal (includes elements of trust, admiration and respect), Products and Services (includes elements of quality, innovation and good value for money), Vision and Leadership and Financial Performance.

Notable Improvements, Prominent Declines
Volkswagen Group, plagued by an emissions scandal in 2016, is starting to show signs of reputational recovery, rebounding 8.7 points to an RQ score of 63.46 (poor). The company tied with Toyota Motor Corporation (80.21, excellent) for the largest RQ increase in 2017. JCPenney (+6.4) also shows notable improvement, earning the highest RQ score the company has had in the past decade. UPS (2012) and 3M (2011) return to the top ten after multi-year absences.

Wells Fargo and Takata are the only companies to score at ‘critical’ levels. Wells Fargo fell 20.6 points, from a “fair” (69.73) score in 2016 to 49.11. Takata debuted at the bottom (#100) of the RQ list with a score of 48.70.

Other companies showing marked declines are Procter & Gamble Co. (-5.3), Samsung (-5.3), Chipotle (-4.6) and Bank of America (-4.6). Procter & Gamble’s decline is evident across all reputation dimensions, but particularly pronounced with Workplace Environment.

Methodology
The 2017 Harris Poll Reputation Quotient was conducted online in English, among 23,633 U.S. respondents from November 29 – December 16, 2016, with preliminary nominating waves of research conducted among 4,092 respondents from September 13 -15 and October 4 – 6, 2016. The Annual RQ study begins with a Nomination Phase, which is used to identify the companies with the most “visible” reputations. All respondents are asked, unaided, to name companies that stand out as having the best and worst reputations. Online nominations are summed to create a total number of nominations for each company. The final list of the 100 most visible companies in the U.S. is measured in the RQ Ratings Phase. In the ratings phase, respondents are randomly assigned to rate two of the companies with which they are “very” or “somewhat” familiar. After the first company rating is completed, the respondent is given the option to rate the second company. Companies are rated on their reputation on 20 different attributes that comprise the Reputation Quotient instrument. The attributes are grouped into six different reputation dimensions: Emotional Appeal, Financial Performance, Products and Services, Social Responsibility, Vision and Leadership, and Workplace Environment.

Respondents for this survey were selected from among those who have agreed to participate in Harris Poll and sample partner surveys. The data have been weighted to reflect the composition of the adult population. Because the sample is based on those who agreed to participate in an online panel, no estimates of theoretical sampling error can be calculated.

Source: The Harris Poll

MacDailyNews Take: Choosing a side on virtually any issue, whether it be corporate taxes, App Store approvals, gun emojis, or H1-B visas risks alienating +/-50% of your potential customer base.

Companies, especially those with excellent scores currently, should be wary of the risk. CEOs themselves should be cognizant that not every one of their employees shares their views on every single topic and that, by presuming to speak for the company instead of merely for themselves, they risk tainting their company’s brand with +/-50% of the company’s potential customer base.

Some people have said that I shouldn’t get involved politically because probably half our customers are Republicans… so I’m going to just stay away from all that political stuff.Apple CEO Steve Jobs, August 25, 2004

SEE ALSO:
Apple joins fight against President Trump’s executive order, ‘Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States’ – February 6, 2017
Apple, Google, others draft joint letter regarding President Trump’s executive order, ‘Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States’ – February 2, 2017
Google’s Eric Schmidt wore staff badge at Hillary Clinton’s ‘victory’ party – November 16, 2016
WikiLeaks emails show extremely close relationship between Clinton campaign and Google’s Eric Schmidt – November 1, 2016
Eric Schmidt-backed startup stealthily working to put Hillary Clinton in the White House – October 9, 2015
Apple jumps the shark by removing the handgun emoji; Gun owners might want to reconsider buying Apple’s products – August 3, 2016
Apple App Store rejects satirical Hillary Clinton game, despite offering dozens of anti-Trump games – July 27, 2016
Apple’s politics may be hurting its brand – June 29, 2016
Apple’s detestable moral hypocrisy – June 21, 2016
The sickening hypocrisy of Starbucks and Apple – April 18, 2016
Apple CEO Steve Jobs: ‘I’m going to just stay away from all that political stuff’ – August 25, 2004

76 Comments

    1. Nice use of the umlaut since you seem to side with an actual fascist who is using rhetoric against the judiciary like all authoritarians do. I’ve been reading some of your posts, and you’re either deliberately misinformed, obviously racist with your comments directed at the former president, unable to process information, unmoved by facts, or a massively uneducated person with regards to history or the separation of powers in this country, Or a combination of all of that.

      I’m ashamed that the far right wing of my own political party has devolved into this blind rage against anything they don’t like, selective free speech support, and complete ignorance of basic concepts like separation of powers, checks and balances, article 1, 2 & 3 of the constitution, how the federal budget works, raising the debt ceiling is just authorizing money we’ve already borrowed, debt a deficits are different things and massively cutting taxes will make the deficit explode, free markets are not magic and they need some basic rules, the United States is not a Christian nation (if you can find me one word in the constitution saying so, I’ll change my opinion instantly, but you won’t because it doesn’t, our founders were free masons and “diests” more than anything) , immigration is not a bad thing, trade deals aren’t the reason you lost your factory job but it’s automation, and hundreds of other things.

      Maybe you’d call me a “RINO” but being ideologically pure and relying on emotion and fantasy beliefs that aren’t grounded in actual evidence, isn’t the same as using critical thinking skills like any decent student. There is no excuse for being willfully ignorant and unwilling to learn, there’s nothing wrong with being educated in the scientific method and reality.

        1. If it’s part of my tax burden yes I am. I’m in favor of a hybrid system with a Medicare buy in for people who want it. And make all the for profit insurance companies non profit, and focus on care rather than coverage. Coverage isn’t the issue, it’s care. If profit is your motivation in healthcare, it makes the focus on denying care rather than administering care, and ordering insanely expensive tests that are many times often redundant. F their were under the 501-c3 section, they would be required to apply 51% of their income on delivery, which would have the almost immediate effect of shifting sicker people into Medicare, and healthier people into private insurance so the business is sustainable. It would similar to the franch system which has been rated as #1 in the world for quite some time. The Affordable care Act is almost unchanged from the heritage foundations plan in 1993, and does need some fixes, but it is not in theory a bad law. The free market can do many things, but it cannot adequately produce universal coverage with for profit model, because the incentives are backwards. Does that answer your question?

          1. So, individuals and their extended families who have entered The United States of America illegally, have constitutional rights just because they stepped foot on U.S. soil? AND! You believe they are ENTITLED access to our hospitals, doctors and services they provide? Please, explain in detail, WHY and HOW you can justify such an obtuse point of view. iTell you what…. Would you please provide to me you home address so iCan send them to your front door. OH! and leave your door unlocked just in case you are not home to greet them with open arms and a lavish PARTY for their WELCOME HOME!

            1. Did you actually want to have a healthcare discussion because this response seems a little unhinged and not at all what you asked me about. I fail to see how my response didn’t answer the actual question you asked me, subtext aside. So, what are your thoughts on health care policy?

              As far as undocumented immigrants, i have very little issue with them. Contrary to what you may believe or have been fed, they are not a burden to our systems and in many states contribute quite a bit to the tax base. I am in Wisconsin to answer your question and wouldn’t have a problem hosting anyone, we’ve had several exchange students over the years and enjoyed the experience. Also, Ronald Reagan granted amnesty in the 1980’s it was the right thing to do then, and it’s the right thing now. Give them a path to citizenship and they become the most loyal Americans you’ll ever find. Our daughter’s husbands parents were undocumented and they are fine family, there’s no need to paint with a broad brush that comes from a place of fear instead of knowledge.

              When it comes to refugees you shouldn’t conflate that with “illegal” immigrants. It’s not even remotely the same thing. Refugees the world over go through an extensive vetting process and pose almost no threat, especially women and children which is the United States preference when it comes to refugees.

      1. Not only would I call you a RINO, I would call you a loser, or worse and more accurately, a globalist who would rather run a Soros-financed John McCain or “Biff” Romney. The Bush Crime Syndicate has at last been destroyed and it’s pollution of true Republican ideals is over.

        America first. always.

            1. Godwin’s law states as follows:

              As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1″[2][3]—​​that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler.

              He did not compare you to hitler, he stated a fact about the phrase “America First”. It was used by the isolationist movement, and championed by Charles Lindbergh among other Nazi sympathizers like Henry Ford, who wanted to do business with the Nazi’s. That is not a hitler comparison, it is simply a historical fact. And using such rhetoric stirs a certain sect of the public who ascribes to those views maybe subconsciously. You don’t seem capable of defending arguments with merit or evidence, and instead resort to petulance and name calling.

            2. I think you need to acknowledge your lack of intelligence and ability to understand basic word meanings and sentence structure. You’re plainly incorrect and can only resort to the language of bullies because you recognize you’re at a deficit and instead of learning, you choose to bathe in ignorance.

            3. Botty, as others have pointed out, I didn’t call you a Nazi.
              I just said that you’re using the same uber-nationalistic propaganda phrase used by Americans who wanted to let the Nazis have free reign over Europe.
              I mean, come on, do you deny being an extreme right-winger? I got the impression you were proud of that fact.

            4. Yes it did start as anti involvement in WW2 specifically for America to remain militarily neutral while economically able to sell to both sides without providing aide, but was very much used by extreme isolationists and sympathisers like the ones I stated. The original intent of something that was hijacked by extremists who aligned with the third Reich isn’t the issue, the common use of that slogan is what has been stated and it is what the newer neo-fascists respond to. Again, he didn’t say you’re hitler, he said you seem to agree with that rhetoric and identify as authoritarian. Which after reading a lot of your stuff, you do indeed seem to be. If you’re proud of your positions, and think you’re right, provide evidence and defend your point without selectively and deliberately mis interpreting a post, and own it. And when you’re incorrect about something, just say so and move the discussion forward like a normal debate. There’s no need for name calling and getting defensive… argue like an adult.

            1. The can freely protest all they want, what they can’t have is what they want. It would be unconstitutional, and it’s secular law that is protecting us from an Islamic, Judaic, or Christian theocracy.

              So, as long as we’re a democracy, don’t worry.

            2. As evidence, it doesn’t support your point.

              Sedition? Only if they actually disobey and rebel against authority or cause others to disobey or rebel against authority.
              Should they violate US law by abiding with conflicting Sharia law then it’s an actionable offense.

              Technically all civil disobedience is sedition.

            3. So, WE as Americans have to be subjected to….YouTube’s arrogance and carelessness????? https://apple.news/AgJgBupMzQLWN2zODopUwQg

              “Indirectly, Super Bowl advertisers and companies are funding or providing material support to terrorism and terrorist sympathizers due to YouTube’s shared ad-revenue program,” Feinberg told Fox News, adding that “it shows YouTube’s arrogance and carelessness.”

      2. You’re not a RINO, you’re a CUCK. Your “reality” involves destroying the United States with atheism and immigration from primitive cultures. You are an enemy of Western civilization.

  1. The problem with this country is the 2 party system. I’m sure many people do not identify with either party. And they are left to twist in the wind. Both parties are corrupt self serving and polarizing. We need a change.

    1. The U.S. finally got the change it needed a mere 3 weeks ago.

      As soon as time runs out on the little babies in Congress and on the Soros-funded street rioters having their vapid little temper tantrums by stalling cabinet picks, burning cars, and doing anything they can in futile attempts to preserve the broken status quo that they set up to benefit themselves and the leftist mainstream media’s bleats die down in the face of real and widespread successes, you will realize that the U.S. just elected their first real, independent, non-politician President since George Washington.

      1. I’m going to repost this to you as well since you seem to suffer from the same problem:

        Nice use of the umlaut since you seem to side with an actual fascist who is using rhetoric against the judiciary like all authoritarians do. I’ve been reading some of your posts, and you’re either deliberately misinformed, obviously racist with your comments directed at the former president, unable to process information, unmoved by facts, or a massively uneducated person with regards to history or the separation of powers in this country, Or a combination of all of that.

        I’m ashamed that the far right wing of my own political party has devolved into this blind rage against anything they don’t like, selective free speech support, and complete ignorance of basic concepts like separation of powers, checks and balances, article 1, 2 & 3 of the constitution, how the federal budget works, raising the debt ceiling is just authorizing money we’ve already borrowed, debt a deficits are different things and massively cutting taxes will make the deficit explode, free markets are not magic and they need some basic rules, the United States is not a Christian nation (if you can find me one word in the constitution saying so, I’ll change my opinion instantly, but you won’t because it doesn’t, our founders were free masons and “diests” more than anything) , immigration is not a bad thing, trade deals aren’t the reason you lost your factory job but it’s automation, and hundreds of other things.

        Maybe you’d call me a “RINO” but being ideologically pure and relying on emotion and fantasy beliefs that aren’t grounded in actual evidence, isn’t the same as using critical thinking skills like any decent student. There is no excuse for being willfully ignorant and unwilling to learn, there’s nothing wrong with being educated in the scientific method and reality.

          1. If it’s part of my tax burden yes I am. I’m in favor of a hybrid system with a Medicare buy in for people who want it. And make all the for profit insurance companies non profit, and focus on care rather than coverage. Coverage isn’t the issue, it’s care. If profit is your motivation in healthcare, it makes the focus on denying care rather than administering care, and ordering insanely expensive tests that are many times often redundant. F their were under the 501-c3 section, they would be required to apply 51% of their income on delivery, which would have the almost immediate effect of shifting sicker people into Medicare, and healthier people into private insurance so the business is sustainable. It would similar to the franch system which has been rated as #1 in the world for quite some time. The Affordable care Act is almost unchanged from the heritage foundations plan in 1993, and does need some fixes, but it is not in theory a bad law. The free market can do many things, but it cannot adequately produce universal coverage with for profit model, because the incentives are backwards. Does that answer your question?

            1. NO.. It Does NOT.

              So, individuals and their extended families who have entered The United States of America illegally, have constitutional rights just because they stepped foot on U.S. soil? AND! You believe they are ENTITLED access to our hospitals, doctors and services they provide? Please, explain in detail, WHY and HOW you can justify such an obtuse point of view. iTell you what…. Would you please provide to me you home address so iCan send them to your front door. OH! and leave your door unlocked just in case you are not home to greet them with open arms and a lavish PARTY for their WELCOME HOME! iAssume you live in Wisconsin no? Lovely state Wisconsin…. How many bedrooms will you be providing for these illegal immigrants? Oh… they will need a food allowance too. You might ponder getting a second and possibly a third job Packer fan 😉 to cover THEIR expenses.

            2. Did you actually want to have a healthcare discussion because this response seems a little unhinged and not at all what you asked me about. I fail to see how my response didn’t answer the actual question you asked me, subtext aside. So, what are your thoughts on health care policy?

              As far as undocumented immigrants, i have very little issue with them. Contrary to what you may believe or have been fed, they are not a burden to our systems and in many states contribute quite a bit to the tax base. I am in Wisconsin to answer your question and wouldn’t have a problem hosting anyone, we’ve had several exchange students over the years and enjoyed the experience. Also, Ronald Reagan granted amnesty in the 1980’s it was the right thing to do then, and it’s the right thing now. Give them a path to citizenship and they become the most loyal Americans you’ll ever find. Our daughter’s husbands parents were undocumented and they are fine family, there’s no need to paint with a broad brush that comes from a place of fear instead of knowledge.

              When it comes to refugees you shouldn’t conflate that with “illegal” immigrants. It’s not even remotely the same thing. Refugees the world over go through an extensive vetting process and pose almost no threat, especially women and children which is the United States preference when it comes to refugees.

            3. So, the undocumented, illegals, in this country, who have failed to go through the proper vetting channels to obtain U.S. citizenship have U.S. Constitutional Rights?

            4. Furthermore, from your response, iPonder you are willing to house those refugees in your home indefinitely @ YOUR EXPENSE? A simple Yes or No answer will suffice.

            5. That really depends on how they entered the country. Most (78-85% it’s hard to find numbers past 2015) over stay a tourist or work visa, so they did enter the country legally. In those cases, yes they should be granted citizenship and have rights as long as they’re paying taxes, which is a significant majority of them. Now, if they entered without going through us immigration initially, then grant them amnesty and a path towards becoming a citizen by going through the normal citizenship test and getting in the tax rolls. If anyone refuses those conditions, excluding religious persecution, or defection from their home nation then and only then should they be treated as non compliant and deported, or if they commit violent crimes.

              With regards to your second question, yes the wife and i wouldn’t have a single problem hosting a refugee for any length of time. Jesus teaches that, and it’s a good thing. I feel as though I already made that clear?

            6. Good. Now we are getting to my point. I appreciate your empathy. It most certainly depends how they entered the county. Those who are in fact here illegally are fully aware that they are breaking the law and do everything in their power to remain hidden within our boarders. Keep in mind, many of those illegally here have cash paying jobs. These funds get sent back to their counties of origin to the expense of the legitimate tax paying citizens. iConcur, we have a very difficult problem to solve regarding our immigration policies. First and foremost we NEED to rid our country of first and repeat violent crime offenders both foreign and domestic. Keep the dialogue going with an open and objective mind. Cheers. God Bless America. Thank You Jesus + One Nation, Under God.

            1. That was a typo, and thank you for catching that. God can mean many things, and a deist would use god as a stand in for supreme being in any language. That is literally a deist. But they don’t ascribe to any particular religion, and the Declaration of Independence does not refer to Christianity or any other religion, nor does the constitution. So show me where in either one of those documents where it says “the United States is a Christian nation founded on on Christianity and it is the national state religion” … the establishment clause would beg to differ with that.

          1. That was a typo, and thank you for catching that. God can mean many things, and a deist would use god as a stand in for supreme being in any language. That is literally a deist. But they don’t ascribe to any particular religion, and the Declaration of Independence does not refer to Christianity or any other religion, nor does the constitution. So show me where in either one of those documents where it says “the United States is a Christian nation founded on on Christianity and it is the national state religion” … the establishment clause would beg to differ with that.

      2. Yeah, now if he could just stop using social media, quit trying to slam every little thing ( Ivanka-Nordstroms, etc.) I truly believe he is not capable of not responding due to his perceived slights, or holding back on every little petty thing that happens…if he could then I think it would bode well for him.

        1. Despite some misgivings, I was hopeful. I really was. But with what’s happened in the last couple of weeks, it has become apparent that we’ve got an Imperial Clown as commander-in-chief. All presidents have a rough start and a learning curve to ascend. But we’ve witnessed gross incompetence of the likes not seen in modern times and maybe ever in this country. His lack of focus on issues important to the country is one example. Ivanka’s clothing line – WTF?!!

          I don’t give a damn what Trump promised during by the campaign. When his wreck-less actions (and I particularly refer to the fiasco that was the immigration EO) put the lives of American soldiers on the ground needlessly in harms way, that pisses me off! If he had taken the time to consult his SecDef and the Joint Chiefs he would have known that. Apparently, it didn’t even occur to him to ask. Every American on this site, whether Democrat or those “claiming” to be Republican, should feel very concerned about the way that went down. I’m no fan of the liberal left. But embracing gross incompetence as a counterweight is not a winning strategy.

          1. Nope.

            In retrospect, I should have — this is all on me, by the way — I should have delayed it just a bit, so that I could talk to members of Congress, particularly the leadership of committees like this, to prepare them for what was coming, although I think most people would agree that this has been a topic of President Trump certainly during his campaign and during the transition process. — Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly, February 7, 2017

            1. Yes, I heard his mea culpa on the radio this morning. Good for him. But he’s 4 star general from the Marines so I’m not buying it. He would have known better. I suspect he’s stepping up to take one on the chin for his boss, which is where the buck really stops.

            2. That makes perfect sense, and is most likely. It might become an Oliver North moment. It’s also the mo of many administrations regardless of party. This one however seems to be careening off the cliff and testing our checks and balances.

          2. Don’t forget the disastrous raid he ordered in Yemen, in which a SEAL was killed, over a dozen women and children were killed, other SEALs injured, and a $70 million helicopter lost.
            Oh. And the actual target got away.

            Obama had decided to hold off on this raid because the information wasn’t yet good enough to be sure it was a good plan.

            Guess making sure something is worth doing isn’t a priority for Trump. He can just blame others for his bad decisions that get people killed.

        2. So, WE as Americans have to be subjected to….YouTube’s arrogance and carelessness????? https://apple.news/AgJgBupMzQLWN2zODopUwQg

          “Indirectly, Super Bowl advertisers and companies are funding or providing material support to terrorism and terrorist sympathizers due to YouTube’s shared ad-revenue program,” Feinberg told Fox News, adding that “it shows YouTube’s arrogance and carelessness.”

    2. Yep.
      That’s also why being engaged in the “treat people well” and “don’t make an environmental mess” part of politics doesn’t get companies in as much trouble. I’d say a fair number of people who are tepidly Republican support equal rights and not polluting the planet.
      Remember: the percentage of people who care enough about their party or political philosophy to vote one day a year (or even less often) is fairly low. How likely do you think they are to pick a company based on a political difference they disagree with, but don’t find reprehensible?

      1. Just as an example: Less than 19% of the people who live in the United States voted for Trump, but that was enough to win the electoral college. An important thing to remember whether you support him or are horrified by him. He doesn’t really have that many people who even cared enough to vote for him. And probably a bunch of those held their noses when they did so.
        Maybe this country isn’t as far gone into fascism as many fear. It does bring to mind the quote:
        “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

  2. How many visits did Eric T. Mole make to the White House whilst OhBlah Blah was playing golf and was nowhere to be found?
    Google and their evil, infected the walls of the U.S. government over the past 8 years. Any and ALL Android related systems should be purged from OUR governments representatives and offices. Hey GOOGLE…… why don’t you go outside and go play, Hide and Go Fck Yourself. Google is a treasonous entity that should never be trusted. Read between the lines MOLE .!..

  3. Most of Apple’s sales ( 64% ) are to customers outside of the US, so aligning with one American party would annoy considerably less than 18% of Apple’s customers, certainly not 50%.

    On the other hand, not taking a stand about the environment, human rights or demonisation of minorities would annoy a very high proportion of Apple’s global customers.

  4. That Google is 8th on the list of top reputations despite their crooked CEO being in the tank and blatantly aiding the Democrat Party (to record losses, I might add) just highlights the leftist mainstream media’s penchant for protecting their own.

    If the public knew the facts about Google, the company would be in a shambles reputationally and otherwise today. Unleash the antitrust hounds upon the richly deserving Google, President Trump!!

    1. I’m an Apple customer (Macs, iPhones, iPads, Apple TVs, iPods, Apple Music, iCloud Storage, iTunes Store, iBooks Store, Airport Base Stations, Apple accessories, etc.) and I don’t agree with most of the politics that emanate from Cook’s piehole.

      As you may have witnessed last November, I am not alone.

  5. I think corporations should stay the hell out of politics as far as parties are concerned and that includes the PACS they use to filter money to parties and candidates. CEOs should feel free to give to whomever they wish out of their own personal bank account.

    As far as corporate reputation goes, here are my concerns:
    1- Do you make a great product?
    2- Do you stand behind it (warranty, repairs, parts)?
    3- Do you pay your workers a fair wage?
    4- Does your company behave and not pollute the earth to save a penny?

    If the answer to all are yes, the rest will take care of itself.

Add Your Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.