3 ms·
You're right, the article reads like a PR plant. However, the author doesn't seem to be a shill for PR flacks in her other stories[1]: - a relentless stream of
by panarky 13y ago
You're right, the article reads like a PR plant. However, the author doesn't seem to be a shill for PR flacks in her other stories[1]:
- a relentless stream of articles on appalling behavior of apparel manufacturers exploiting workers in Bangladesh
- retailers putting religion at the center of their brand image
- the struggle for a living wage by fast-food workers
- the launch of Walmart's money transfer service, along with stories about Walmart exploiting workers and taxpayers
[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/
- eco 13y agoPutting on my tinfoil hat it seems like almost all of her recent articles cast negative light on existing large retailers. You'll get shot going to Starbucks and Jack in the Box. J.C. Penny still hasn't forked over money for the victims of the Bangladesh factory collapse (and neither has Walmart but they don't use that factory so that's a weird thing to mention). You're exploiting fast-food workers by eating there. Hobby Lobby and Chick-fil-A are controlled by religious nutjobs. None of these are a problem if you shop at home from, say, Amazon.com.
- raverbashing 13y agoYes, this sounds like "Freelance Journalist"