Monica Lozano joins Apple’s board of directors

Apple today announced that Monica Lozano, president and CEO of College Futures Foundation, has been elected to Apple’s board of directors. Lozano brings with her a broad range of leadership experience in the public and private sectors, as well as a long and storied track record as a champion for equity, opportunity, and representation.

Monica Lozano
Monica Lozano
Prior to joining College Futures Foundation, Lozano spent 30 years in media as editor and publisher of La Opinión, the largest Spanish-language newspaper in the US, helping shine a light on issues from infant mortality to the AIDS epidemic. She went on to become chairman and CEO of La Opinión’s parent company, ImpreMedia. Lozano continues to serve on the boards of Target Corporation and Bank of America Corporation.

“Monica has been a true leader and trailblazer in business, media, and an ever-widening circle of philanthropic efforts to realize a more equitable future — in our schools and in the lives of all people,” said Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO, in a statement. “Her values and breadth of experience will help Apple continue to grow, to innovate, and to be a force for good in the lives of our teams, customers, and communities.”

“Monica has been a pioneer in every organization fortunate enough to benefit from her vision and expertise,” said Arthur Levinson, Apple’s chairman, in a statement. “After a thorough and fruitful search, I couldn’t be more confident in the positive impact Monica will have on our board and Apple as a whole.”

“I’ve always admired Apple’s commitment to the notion that technology, at its best, should empower all people to improve their lives and build a better world,” said Lozano, in a statement. “I look forward to working with Tim, Art, and the other board members to help Apple carry those values forward and build on a rich and productive history.”

Throughout her accomplished career as a business leader, public servant, and philanthropist, Lozano has made an indelible impact on companies and communities in the US and around the world, earning awards from organizations like The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights and the United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

In her role as CEO of College Futures Foundation, Lozano has been a tireless advocate for expanding access to higher education, partnering with philanthropic organizations, state and local governments, and local communities to improve opportunity for low-income students and students of color.

Lozano is a co-founder of the Aspen Institute Latinos and Society Program, and a former chair of both the University of California Board of Regents and the board of directors of the Weingart Foundation, a private philanthropic organization. Lozano is also a former board member of The Walt Disney Company.

MacDailyNews Take: Congratulations, Monica Lozano!


    1. So did everyone else.

      See how well your forced diversity shit works, moronic libs? Now, anytime someone “of color” gets a position, regardless of how qualified they are (as Lozano is), they are immediately dismissed as a token hire.

      Forced diversity demeans, it doesn’t uplift, Timmy. Because it is, by definition, racist.

    2. I would like to be polite, so here is my most polite possible take:

      Only a racist pig would claim that the former CEO of a major corporation, foundation president, Disney board member, and Chair of the Regents for America’’s most prestigious public university system is unqualified just because she is a Latina.

      1. You don’t get it. It’s policies like you seem to espouse – forcing diversity – that cast doubt when minorities are hired.

        “First Then” said it best above:

        Anytime someone “of color” gets a position, regardless of how qualified they are (as Lozano is), they are immediately dismissed as a token hire.

        Forced diversity demeans, it doesn’t uplift… Because it is, by definition, racist.

        1. You are wrong about me. I do not support “forced diversity.” I support selecting the most qualified candidate who brings the most value to the position. Quite often, that means hiring someone who looks more like the majority of the American public and less like the majority of existing board members.

          What is, by definition, racist is the assumption that males with white skins are automatically more qualified than women with brown skins. What is, by definition, racist is the assumption that any Latina who isn’t emptying bedpans and dying of Covid-19 must be a diversity hire who has risen above her God-ordained station in life.

          By those standards, many of the comments in this thread are, by definition, sexist, racist, piggish, and profoundly unAmerican.

        1. Hispanic with a real vagina? YOU’RE HIRED!

          Now, can I convince you to turn lesbian, too? Oh, can I also poke out your eyes and/or puncture your eardrums? (We won’t do both: Helen Keller.)

          Any one of those additional checkboxes would really make my empty soul feel fuller for the split second when I virtue-signal via press release. – Tim Cook

    1. Apple said absolutely nothing about “social causes” in connection with this appointment. They simply announced that they were appointing a highly QUALIFIED individual with extensive executive and board experience. The only people connecting a “social cause” to this are the people like those posting here who assume that only social activism can explain hiring a Latina over a white man. The only “social cause” visible in this thread is the cause promoted by those who regard people who look like Monica Lozano as inherently less qualified than people who look like themselves.

      1. Well thanks for finally making it clear what we have misunderstood about you for a year or so now.

        It explains your positions on everything from Russian collusion, impeachment, the Wuhan Virus and voter fraud.

        You obviously have a reading comprehension issue.

        Rather than understanding the written word, you project your views based on the poster rather than the post.

        Thanks for clearing that up….

        1. Do you think that there would have been a single post here suggesting that the new board member was unqualified if the article described somebody with an identical resume whose photo showed a guy with white skin and hair whose name was Billy Bob or Frederick?

          Of course not. The posters are suggesting that Lozano was selected for something other than her qualifications solely because they assume that a Latina board member must be a diversity hire.

          1. You mean someone like Hunter Biden?
            You mean ignored by most news shows?

            You are simply clueless.
            Explaining something to you is like a brick wall (but at least you know where THAT stands….)

            If a person is qualified, they are qualified.
            It is Leftist like you that use diversity as a reason for hire.
            This is what is being thrown in your mortar…I mean face.

  1. The real issue isn’t Monica’s ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation, it’s her involvement with non-profits. As a for-profit company, Apple’s stock holders elect board members. Large non-profits rarely elect board members – typically politicians get their preferred people on the board. I think the term is cronyism. Ipso facto, Monica is a crony. Also remember undemocratic non-profits control more wealth in the US than for-profits. Do you think China, Russia, Saudi Arabia or any other actor with a vested interest can get their folks on these ‘philanthropic’ boards? Which large non-profits are the largest share holders in Apple, Google, Facebook, etc? Do you think they put their shills on these boards? Disrespect Monica, not for her “isms” but rather for likely being a swamp dwelling crony.

    1. Where did you get the idea that ImpreMedia, Target, Bank of America, and The Walt Disney Company were nonprofits? They are about as capitalist as anyone might desire.

      1. Simple, major non-profits are often times significant or majority stock holders of for-profits. CALPERS (California Public Retirement & Pension Fund), a non-profit that according to Wikipedia “ with $300.3 billion in assets.[3] CalPERS is known for its shareholder activism.” This pattern applies to nearly every state’s public retirement fund – so State sponsored, non-profits are likely invested at several trillion dollars in to for-profits. Do you think they leverage their power on these boards? Do you think the members on these boards are elected or do politicians place their cronies there? So I addressed only state pension funds, do you think Sierra Club, AARP and any major non-profit also invest heavily into for-profits and use that clout to shape the board?

        The problem is corporations are roughly democratic, with stock holders voting annually. Non-profits are the domain of oligarchs and powerful politicians. They have little oversight and can easily increase the hidden power of dangerous people. Also ask yourself, why do politicians and billionaires start non-profit foundations? To do good? Or wield more hidden power?

Reader Feedback

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