At annual shareholders’ meeting, Apple CEO Tim Cook was questioned about privacy, politics, and new products

“Should Apple have more ‘ideological diversity’ on its board? That was the question facing CEO Tim Cook, along with Apple’s board and investors, at the company’s annual shareholder meeting Friday, when activist Justin Danhof pushed a proposal aimed at increasing such diversity on the company’s board of directors. ‘Diversity is not what someone looks like, it’s the sum of what they think,’ Danhof said while speaking at the meeting,” Ian Sherr reports for CNET.

“‘True diversity comes from diversity of thought. There is ample evidence that the Company — and Silicon Valley generally — operate in ideological hegemony that eschews conservative people, thoughts, and values,’ the center wrote in its proposal to shareholders. ‘This ideological echo chamber can result in groupthink that is the antithesis of diversity. This can be a major risk factor for shareholders,'” Sherr reports. “‘We are open to people from all walks of life,’ Cook said, noting that this includes political points of view, religious beliefs or sexual orientation. He also encouraged anyone with concerns to ‘say something.’ ‘We live in a very polarized world today,’ Cook added, saying he doesn’t believe it needs to be and that he doesn’t ‘check people at the door’ about their beliefs. He also noted that though Apple is pro-immigration, pro-environment and pro-privacy, he doesn’t see that as politics. ‘For us, we focus on policy things.'”

“During the debate, Another shareholder raised concerns that after the 2017 white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, VA., Apple donated $1 million to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which the shareholder called a hate group,” Sherr reports. “Concerns about conservative views were just some of the several topics Cook discussed with shareholders in attendance at the company’s Steve Jobs Theater.”

As for products, “shareholders didn’t get a clear answer as to where Apple is headed at the shareholder meeting, though they rarely do,” Sherr reports. “They did however approve all the company’s board members for another term.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: No, Apple didn’t give sneak peeks of Project Titan, the next-gen modular Mac Pro, or Apple Glasses at the annual meeting of shareholders, but, still, a fun time was had by all!

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:
Harris Poll: Corporate reputations can become politically polarized – February 9, 2017
Apple, J.P. Morgan under fire for donations to notorious Southern Poverty Law Center – August 28, 2017
Silicon Valley donated 60 times more to Clinton than to Trump – November 7, 2016
99% of Silicon Valley’s political dollars are going to Hillary Clinton – October 25, 2016
Apple’s politics may be hurting its brand – June 29, 2016
Apple refuses to aid 2016 GOP presidential convention over Trump comments – June 18, 2016
Apple and Silicon Valley employees love Bernie Sanders. Donald Trump? Not so much – May 6, 2016
Apple among top employers of Bernie Sanders donors – April 20, 2016
Apple employees donate $15 to Obama for every $1 to Romney – July 27, 2012
Apple, other tech firm employees’ contributions favor Democrats over Republicans, Obama over Clinton – April 14, 2008
Apple CEO Steve Jobs: ‘I’m going to just stay away from all that political stuff’ – August 25, 2004

11 Comments

  1. Steve Jobs operated as a conservative. Watch his presentation to the Cupertino City Council where he asked for approval of Apple’s new HQ plan. He was peppered with typical liberal demands for free stuff, like free WIFI for everyone, and he responded brilliantly. I know he was a liberal politically but he fully respected all customers and would never denigrate a customers political views. The Tim Cook donation to the SPLC was a huge support to a real hate group.

        1. Catholics. People who believe killing babies in the womb is evil and murder. White men with “privilege.” Those who favor a small, weak federal govt like the founders intended. People who believe in the U.S. Constitution as written. People who believe in borders. Those who understand that mass murderers, by definition, do not follow gun laws no matter how many laws foolish politicians who pander to illogical fools enact to infringe on the rights of law-abiding citizens. Those who realize “trans” people are mentally ill and should not be mutilated by so-called doctors and/or pumped full of cancer-causing opposite sex hormones and, when they are male chromosomally, forever, regardless of how much estrogen they artificially and unnaturally pump into their bodies, they should not be “competing” against the opposite sex in sports. People who see clearly the “climate change” ruse is really the UN playing Robin Hood. Etcetera.





          1. Thank you for your thoughtful reply Brutal. All Catholics? Generally speaking, a fetus is in the womb while a baby is outside the womb. Small gov is appropriate for the small mostly rural population comprising the original small land area in the 13 states. Why should the Center not support transgenders competing in female sports? Oh, I see that your last sentence reveals that you think that the Center hates you and your clan. The UN is playing Robin Hood? How about some Rightwingersplaining there.

    1. The far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) lists several conservative Christian organizations as “hate groups” or “extremists” because of their religious views.

      SPLC has targeted conservative groups like the Family Research Council and Alliance Defending Freedom, but also more recently it went after Maajid Nawaz, a liberal who was a former Islamic radical. The SPLC labeled him and others “anti-Muslim extremists” but later apologized and paid him $3.375 million to settle a lawsuit. Columnist Marc Thiessen said the SPLC “has become a caricature of itself, labeling virtually anyone who does not fall in line with its left-wing ideology an ‘extremist’ or ‘hate group.'”

      The FBI has removed the SPLC from its list of legitimate resources on hate crimes, but other groups have not.

      It’s not that Tim Cook didn’t get the memo. He had a hissy fit based on misreporting and misinterpretation of the President’s statements following the Charlottesville rally. He deliberately chose SPLC and abused his position with Apple to say, basically,” We have a lot of money and we can back far-left fringe groups with it.” Cook is still paying for his little fit that did nothing except hurt Apple.

      Aligning Apple with the despicable SPLC is something Cook will never be able to live down. Cook’s use of Apple to further his own political beliefs is also despicable and an abuse of the position that Steve Jobs handed him.

  2. Apple is constantly criticizing data-mining companies like Facebook and Google but those companies remain Wall Street’s favorite stocks. Morality has nothing to do with big investors wanting to make huge amounts of money. Big investors favor data-mining companies and their ability to turn free personal data into stacks of gold. Apple can’t do that and Wall Street knows it. Apple hasn’t yet found a way to monetize privacy and security. I wonder if Apple going into health care can change that.

    I’m waiting to see what the new Mac Pro is going to be like. I think it would be difficult for Apple to mess up such a critical product but Apple does things that are quite unexpected. It scares me to hear about a stack-able Mac Pro which would be idiocy to the highest degree. How could any company think of such a ridiculous approach for a pro computer. Apple does some really weird stuff just to differentiate itself from other computer companies and not necessarily in a good way.

    1. I’m with you on the concern about a stackable Mac Pro that only accomplishes complexity, desk mess and higher cost (and inconvenience) than an upgraded cheese grater would. It better be a workable brilliant solution beyond reproach. The 2013 Mac Pro was anything but.

    2. Apple has found a way to monetize privacy and security. Those are selling points ofiOS devices – iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch…

      Do you want Apple to sell a security “subscription” in which Apple will only protect your data if you pay $5.95 per month?

      What, exactly, do you expect Apple to do? Become like Google and Facebook? Those companies are headed for big problems, imo.

  3. As usual, Cook delivers another nothing sandwich, patting himself on the back for new wearables while ignoring any concrete guidance or directly answering any questions.

    No, Apple leadership is not diverse.

    No, Apple isn’t offering investors adequate information or guidance, which is a big reason its P/E ratio is tiny. Lack of TRUST.

    New leadership please.

Leave a Reply to macnificentseven48 Cancel reply

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