this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2023
1403 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

59038 readers
3057 users here now

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


Our Rules


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

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

~Court precedent. Shareholders have sued and won for corporations "failing to uphold fiduciary responsibilities" and other similar bullshit. So, now it's baked into corporate culture.~

Update: See reply below. Courts have upheld that corporations have no requirement to seek profits over all else.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's actually not the case.

"courts have consistently refused to hold directors liable for failing to maximise shareholder value"

"In 2014, the United States Supreme Court voiced its position in no uncertain terms. In Burwell v Hobby Lobby Stores Inc., the Supreme Court stated that “Modern corporate law does not require for profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else”. "

Just more corporate propaganda, that's all.

https://legislate.ai/blog/does-the-law-require-public-companies-to-maximise-shareholder-value

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Holy shit! That's good to know. Thank you.