4 ms·

Good marketing move, Monsanto has a very bad doppelganger. If they continue with Monsanto ethic it will not take too long to have that doppelganger attached to

Good marketing move, Monsanto has a very bad doppelganger. If they continue with Monsanto ethic it will not take too long to have that doppelganger attached to Bayer.

sschueller 8y ago
Bayer doesn't exactly have a good reputation either [1]. I don't think it is a good PR move at all. There is some litigation going on against Monsanto and probably a lot more to come. In the news you will read Bayer now instead of Monsanto which is going to hurt the Bayer brand. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer
- Zhyl 8y ago
  Buying slave labour from the Nazis, massive stake in the company that made Zyklon B, invented heroin, knowingly gave people AIDS with an anti-haemophiliac drug when it was banned in US markets. Quite the rap sheet.
  - Shivetya 8y ago
    The danger as a society we have to day is the people who grew up during those events are all passing away. We soon no longer will have people of any influence who experienced the horrors of a true world war. Names then have little connection to the past and companies "reinventing" themselves are only further opening this knowledge gap.
    - eip 8y ago
      > We soon no longer will have people of any influence who experienced the horrors of a true world war. Be careful what you wish for.
    - dionidium 8y ago
      The danger as a society we have to day is the people who grew up during those events are all passing away. This seems to say exactly the opposite of what you think it says. By your own admission, you're describing the actions of dead people. What does any of that have to do with the people running the company today?
      - saalweachter 8y ago
        I think at some point you might absolve the present-day organizations of the sins of their predecessors - organizations, corporations, families, countries are made of people, and the moral responsibility ultimately lies with the individuals who choose to act, to not act, or to allow others to do so. But it's also the case that an organizations future is based in its past; even if the individual people who chose to act have long since died and there are none alive who know their face or name, if a group of people (an organization, a country, a corporation) has enriched itself through immoral acts in the past, even if it acts morally today, is it right to leave them with the fruits of its crimes? If a people has been impoverished by crimes committed against them in the past, even if no one today is still wronging them, is it right to leave them impoverished today?
- lastUsername 8y ago
  This is true. But, unlike Monsanto, that's not what you think first when you hear Bayer. That's a fundamental difference.
dsr_ 8y ago
In English, doppelganger generally means "duplicate", or "clone" or "identical twin", with a connotation of being unexpected, unnatural or evil. Perhaps you mean "reputation"?
chiefalchemist 8y ago
So how is it a good marketing move if Monsanto's brand reputation cancer gets spread to the parent and it's other children?
- lastUsername 8y ago
  Read the second part of the message and you will understand that the first part is ironic.

Good marketing move, Monsanto has a very bad doppelganger. If they continue with Monsanto ethic it will not take too long to have that doppelganger attached to Bayer.

sschueller 8y ago

Bayer doesn't exactly have a good reputation either [1]. I don't think it is a good PR move at all. There is some litigation going on against Monsanto and probably a lot more to come. In the news you will read Bayer now instead of Monsanto which is going to hurt the Bayer brand. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer

Zhyl 8y ago
Buying slave labour from the Nazis, massive stake in the company that made Zyklon B, invented heroin, knowingly gave people AIDS with an anti-haemophiliac drug when it was banned in US markets. Quite the rap sheet.
- Shivetya 8y ago
  The danger as a society we have to day is the people who grew up during those events are all passing away. We soon no longer will have people of any influence who experienced the horrors of a true world war. Names then have little connection to the past and companies "reinventing" themselves are only further opening this knowledge gap.
  - eip 8y ago
    > We soon no longer will have people of any influence who experienced the horrors of a true world war. Be careful what you wish for.
  - dionidium 8y ago
    The danger as a society we have to day is the people who grew up during those events are all passing away. This seems to say exactly the opposite of what you think it says. By your own admission, you're describing the actions of dead people. What does any of that have to do with the people running the company today?
    - saalweachter 8y ago
      I think at some point you might absolve the present-day organizations of the sins of their predecessors - organizations, corporations, families, countries are made of people, and the moral responsibility ultimately lies with the individuals who choose to act, to not act, or to allow others to do so. But it's also the case that an organizations future is based in its past; even if the individual people who chose to act have long since died and there are none alive who know their face or name, if a group of people (an organization, a country, a corporation) has enriched itself through immoral acts in the past, even if it acts morally today, is it right to leave them with the fruits of its crimes? If a people has been impoverished by crimes committed against them in the past, even if no one today is still wronging them, is it right to leave them impoverished today?
lastUsername 8y ago
This is true. But, unlike Monsanto, that's not what you think first when you hear Bayer. That's a fundamental difference.

dsr_ 8y ago

In English, doppelganger generally means "duplicate", or "clone" or "identical twin", with a connotation of being unexpected, unnatural or evil. Perhaps you mean "reputation"?

chiefalchemist 8y ago

So how is it a good marketing move if Monsanto's brand reputation cancer gets spread to the parent and it's other children?

lastUsername 8y ago
Read the second part of the message and you will understand that the first part is ironic.