17 ms·
This is nothing but PR and ensuring they have a moral high ground among their target audience. It does nothing to address the issue and makes people who use the
by nocoder 9y ago
This is nothing but PR and ensuring they have a moral high ground among their target audience. It does nothing to address the issue and makes people who use their services feel good about themselves. This is similar to how FB supports net neutrality in US but pushes their free basics in other countries. Additionally, this also provides fodder to extremists saying look how all these people are against us because they are only punishing our views, this gives the extremists more ammunition in their brain washing of vulnerable population. A corporation does not stand for anything except it's profits and will shift its moral position based on what is most helpful to the bottom line.
- ratsmack 9y agoAnd what you describe is why I believe there are more actors involved in the decision, possibly customers. The possibility of losing contracts is a good incentive to remove a small player. The "I was in a bad mood" strikes me as a cover to protect someone involved in the decision.