4 ms·

Maybe we should mandate that in labelling guidelines on consumer products, the name and logo of the ultimate parent owner of the company selling the product sho

Maybe we should mandate that in labelling guidelines on consumer products, the name and logo of the ultimate parent owner of the company selling the product should be prominently featured alongside whatever the regular brand is. Many products already do it eg “TheThing: By TheParentCompany”. But yes maybe consumers should be aware who ultimately benefits from their purchase of a product, and easily be able to decide to buy more independent brands.

cpursley 4y ago
Can we so this with politicians, too? Make them wear patches of all their corporate sponsors like race car drivers?
- scrollaway 4y ago
  That is more about sponsorship disclosures. A better parallel would be with disclosure of paid or sponsored material on broadcasts. But yes, I’d be all for that. If a bill is drafted, all the entities that had input into that draft should be listed. If a politician gives a speech at the request of a compensating entity, that should be disclosed at the beginning: “This speech was paid for in part by Audible. More on them at the end of the speech”
- spaetzleesser 4y ago
  It’s more like publishing who actually wrote legislation. Often it’s lobbyists who write laws and politicians put their names on them.
gruez 4y ago
>the name and logo of the ultimate parent owner of the company selling the product should be prominently featured alongside whatever the regular brand is. How do you define "ultimate parent owner of the company"? In the case of Unilever, they own the brands directly, so it's straightforward to determine the "ultimate parent owner". But it's not hard to register a separate LLC for each brand, which makes the "ultimate parent owner" much murkier, especially if the LLC has weird ownership structures.
- wardedVibe 4y ago
  I just want BlackRock to suddenly become a brand so people are aware of the conflict of interest they generate
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    Is blackrock the ultimate owner? Or the taxpayers of the taxpayer funded pension plans and 401k owners who Blackrock invests on behalf of the ultimate owner?

cpursley 4y ago

Can we so this with politicians, too? Make them wear patches of all their corporate sponsors like race car drivers?

scrollaway 4y ago
That is more about sponsorship disclosures. A better parallel would be with disclosure of paid or sponsored material on broadcasts. But yes, I’d be all for that. If a bill is drafted, all the entities that had input into that draft should be listed. If a politician gives a speech at the request of a compensating entity, that should be disclosed at the beginning: “This speech was paid for in part by Audible. More on them at the end of the speech”
spaetzleesser 4y ago
It’s more like publishing who actually wrote legislation. Often it’s lobbyists who write laws and politicians put their names on them.

gruez 4y ago

>the name and logo of the ultimate parent owner of the company selling the product should be prominently featured alongside whatever the regular brand is. How do you define "ultimate parent owner of the company"? In the case of Unilever, they own the brands directly, so it's straightforward to determine the "ultimate parent owner". But it's not hard to register a separate LLC for each brand, which makes the "ultimate parent owner" much murkier, especially if the LLC has weird ownership structures.

wardedVibe 4y ago
I just want BlackRock to suddenly become a brand so people are aware of the conflict of interest they generate
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  Is blackrock the ultimate owner? Or the taxpayers of the taxpayer funded pension plans and 401k owners who Blackrock invests on behalf of the ultimate owner?