Technology

59390 readers

2543 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1402

Jon Stewart’s Apple TV Plus show ends, reportedly over coverage of AI and China (www.theverge.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

256 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/6745228

TLDR: Apple wants to keep china happy, Stewart was going after china in some way, Apple said don’t, Stewart walked, the show is dead.

Not surprising at all, but sad and shitty and definitely reduces my loyalty to the platform. Hosting Stewart seemed like a real power play from Apple, where conflict like this was inevitable, but they were basically saying, yes we know, but we believe in things and, as a big company with deep pockets that can therefore take risks, to prove it we’re hosting this show.

Changing their minds like this is worse than ever hosting the show in the first place as it shows they probably don’t know what they’re doing or believe in at all, like any big company, and just going for what seems cool, and undermining the very idea of a company like Apple running a streaming platform. I wonder if the Morning Show/Wars people are paying close attention.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 331 points 1 year ago (49 children)

Bummer. That’s some weak and feckless megacorp bullshit. Just like something Stewart would cover, which is why this show was such a great power move. And yet? Infinite profit over all else, so never mind.

Look at John Oliver, he talks shit about HBO constantly. Do they care? Nope, because he has more Emmys than anyone could know what to do with. Respect your talent and reap the rewards. Pretty basic stuff, Apple.

[–] [email protected] 75 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (47 children)

The difference is HBO is a media company that largely operates in the US, and Jon Oliver making fun of them isn’t going to hurt their business at all. Apple is a hardware company that also makes media. And selling hardware in China is critical to their business. Since the CCP owns China, they can get their panties in a twist and just ban Apple. Like they did with government devices.

As a publicly owned company they have a legal responsibility to maximize profit for shareholders. It’s the same reason why Twitter had to agree to the sale to Elon Musk and why they had to force it. It was a terrible move overall but since Elon was buying all outstanding shares and taking it private, the board literally had no legal choice but to take it since he was offering well over market value.

Public companies don’t get to take moral stands when there’s money on the line. They legally have to put shareholders first.

[–] [email protected] 170 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (13 children)

"Public companies...legally have to put shareholders first."

I thought this too, but it is apparently a myth.

"There is a common belief that corporate directors have a legal duty to maximize corporate profits and “shareholder value” — even if this means skirting ethical rules, damaging the environment or harming employees. But this belief is utterly false.

To quote the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in the recent Hobby Lobby case: “Modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not.”

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/corporations-dont-have-to-maximize-profits

[+] [email protected] 75 points 1 year ago (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

well-being of the business…ahead of well-being of his employees.

Hey, I mean, like, corporations are people too, man.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So corporations too should have to go to jail if they break the law. Or in this case close down the building and not perform any commercial activity for a certain time

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Funny how that worked out huh? All the benefits of personhood, but none of the downsides, like mortality, having to pay fair taxes, incarceration for crimes, possible death penalty for killing citizens ...

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

That is literally the whole point of corporations, they're designed to allow people to take more risk. Business law 101.

(If you grossly abuse it, they will "pierce the corporate veil" and arrest those responsible, but again, that's only if you're grossly abusing it)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Still a sticky problem from labor’s perspective, unless the corporate time-out includes salary and healthcare payments. Maybe except the C suite?

But then you might as well keep the company open (Unless it is currently doing harm), and throw the directors in jail.

I always understood stock investing as assuming the risk something like that could happen (I’d a director fucks up, you lose, or vote him out of the job). But now that all of our retirement is tied to the fucking thing it can’t work that way.