ADVERTISEMENT

Is this a double-standard?

NZ Poke

Heisman Candidate
Dec 16, 2007
6,088
7,047
113
tumblr_pcy1tbVya01u1w3aqo1_1280.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: GunsOfFrankEaton
Are you still in New Zealand? Back in America? You've probably mentioned at some point in the rare text between images and tweets.
 

Not in my book of standards....but not for the reasons you may think I would argue.

The proper standard for a business to make hiring and firing decisions is basically the bottom line...do they believe the individual will end up making them more $$$ or costing them $$$ in the end.

If it costs them...they should properly fire them. If not...feel free to keep them on.

There is also the whole “unprovoked” vs. “provoked” defense/discussion to deal with as well....but that one doesn’t hold much water with me personally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TD_4OSU
Twitter banned a black woman for doing a thought experiment.

Read closely....


 
Why haven't I seen an avalanche of the provocations this poor woman suffered to turn into such a hate filled person? For that matter why haven't I seen any?

Just curious to see the triggers, it must of been horrible to turn someone that disgusting.
 
If they are the same company that fired the individual, then yes a double standard. But Disney and NY Times have each their own policies.

Disney did fire James Gunn, of Guardians of the Galaxy, for offensive tweets. It would have been a double standard if they didn’t act.
 
Who cares. Idiots will be idiots. Corporations mainly watch the bottom line. ABC believed they would probably lose more keeping Roseanne and N.Y. Times probably believes they are getting more eyeballs and clicks by keeping her after the discovery of her tweets.
 
Who cares. Idiots will be idiots. Corporations mainly watch the bottom line. ABC believed they would probably lose more keeping Roseanne and N.Y. Times probably believes they are getting more eyeballs and clicks by keeping her after the discovery of her tweets.

Exactly.

And that’s the right standard to follow for a business.
 
Who cares. Idiots will be idiots. Corporations mainly watch the bottom line. ABC believed they would probably lose more keeping Roseanne and N.Y. Times probably believes they are getting more eyeballs and clicks by keeping her after the discovery of her tweets.


I think you are living in the 1990s. Political activism amongst CEOs is the norm these days. It's in the news daily.
 
I think you are living in the 1990s. Political activism amongst CEOs is the norm these days. It's in the news daily.

I guess that explains why CBS's CEO is still on the job; "activism"...........:D
 
I guess that explains why CBS's CEO is still on the job; "activism"...........:D

Sheri Redstone explains why Les Moonves is still on the job. But he may not make it anyway.

That being said, Moonves jumped at the chance to found a CEO council on sexual discrimination and gender equality at the very beginning of the #metoo movement, so your example doesn't really work.
 
Sheri Redstone explains why Les Moonves is still on the job. But he may not make it anyway.

That being said, Moonves jumped at the chance to found a CEO council on sexual discrimination and gender equality at the very beginning of the #metoo movement, so your example doesn't really work.

Smells like do as I say, not as I do/did.....
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT