3 ms·
I'm more inclined to believe that it's the media causing negative PR for the companies. Brand image is everything to big companies so a slew of media attacks ar
by beaconstudios 8y ago
I'm more inclined to believe that it's the media causing negative PR for the companies. Brand image is everything to big companies so a slew of media attacks around a particular topic will often cause the company to change tactics.
- new12345 8y agoTrue. Single most important factor that brings changes to any publicly traded company direction is revenue growth.
- craftyguy 8y agoUnless you're a government-entitled monopoly (in the US: ISPs). Then it doesn't matter what anyone says about you (the company), and 'voting with your wallet' means you (the consumer/citizen) go without a crucial utility.
- DoubleCribble 8y agoOr you can start your own utility and be the change you want to see in the world. A lifestyle business does not appear to be out of reach for those with some technical skills and a modest budget[0]. [0] https://startyourownisp.com/ https://startyourownisp.com/
- craftyguy 8y agoI've considered doing this in the past. You need more than a modest budget to maintain such a system, especially if you plan to sell service (and, inherently, support). It seems like it would be a full time job. In addition, you still rely on those monopolies to provide you with the utility: https://startyourownisp.com/posts/fiber-provider/ https://startyourownisp.com/posts/fiber-provider/
- rvense 8y agoI know some people disapprove of it as a tactic, but I think it's been shown more than once that Greenpeace's shaming campaigns can be quite effective.
- beaconstudios 8y agothat's also just an attempt to generate negative publicity though.