Author Topic: Irvine seen as epicenter of violence against Asian - will it impact sales?  (Read 2598 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline eyephone

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 484
  • -Received: 761
  • Posts: 13731
It is a business, but when a news company targets a company and their employees with unverifiable news. Then be ready to get sued. Lol

Dominion sues Fox News for $1.6 billion for an orchestrated defamatory campaign.
The legal world already new this and it was just a matter when they would file the lawsuit.


If you are pro capitalism, can you really blame Fox / MSNBC for figuring out the secret to profitability?

It's a business. They generate more profit by providing contents that catering to a smaller but more devout audience.

News were different 30 years ago not because human nature was different back then.

We just didn't have the tools we have today. Like big data feeding AI driven prediction models etc

Even with the rapid growth of alternative media, this trend is not reversing.

People in general don't care about caveats and nuances.

Haven't we all accepted (maybe unwilling) that proper policy discussion can be had over Twitter post Trump ?

Offline irvine buyer

  • Yearning for 949 / 714
  • **
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 1
  • -Received: 36
  • Posts: 183
It is a business, but when a news company targets a company and their employees with unverifiable news. Then be ready to get sued. Lol



I totally agree.  While you're at it pointing out news networks being sued for spreading false information, you forgot to mention that CNN and Washington Post already settled with Nick Sandmann after being sued for spreading false narratives about him. 

Several more Sandmann lawsuits against other media organizations are still winding their way through the court system.

Offline eyephone

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 484
  • -Received: 761
  • Posts: 13731
Irvine: correct they settled lawsuits. But I do not think it was $1.6 billion dollars. Lol
But I think Fox News went above and beyond against Dominion.
False narrative is bad, but destroying a company with no evidence is even worst.

Again, without investigative reporting and gathering info from customers and employees about Wells Fargo. No one would of found out about Wells Fargo selling tactics. In which, Wells Fargo paid a big fine, the previous CEO and several key management left.

It is a business, but when a news company targets a company and their employees with unverifiable news. Then be ready to get sued. Lol



I totally agree.  While you're at it pointing out news networks being sued for spreading false information, you forgot to mention that CNN and Washington Post already settled with Nick Sandmann after being sued for spreading false narratives about him. 

Several more Sandmann lawsuits against other media organizations are still winding their way through the court system.

Offline Kenkoko

  • O.C. Resident
  • ***
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 171
  • -Received: 269
  • Posts: 918
It is a business, but when a news company targets a company and their employees with unverifiable news. Then be ready to get sued. Lol

Dominion sues Fox News for $1.6 billion for an orchestrated defamatory campaign.
The legal world already new this and it was just a matter when they would file the lawsuit.

It's not nothing, but doesn't change anything in the grand scheme.

Legal proceedings takes months and years and usually get settled. And while it drags on, this fabrication becomes "news worthy" and generates more clicks and ad revenue.

Regardless of the outcome of the lawsuit, it won't change the already formed public opinion and more importantly won't change how news organizations operate.

Offline eyephone

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 484
  • -Received: 761
  • Posts: 13731
It is a business, but when a news company targets a company and their employees with unverifiable news. Then be ready to get sued. Lol

Dominion sues Fox News for $1.6 billion for an orchestrated defamatory campaign.
The legal world already new this and it was just a matter when they would file the lawsuit.

It's not nothing, but doesn't change anything in the grand scheme.

Legal proceedings takes months and years and usually get settled. And while it drags on, this fabrication becomes "news worthy" and generates more clicks and ad revenue.

Regardless of the outcome of the lawsuit, it won't change the already formed public opinion and more importantly won't change how news organizations operate.

It does matter. Because at least the company and CEO would get compensated for the lost revenue and damage reputation. Also, it sets a big precedent to news. That if they run with a story that they know is not true. Then they would get sued. I mean $1.6 billion is a lot of money.

Offline Kenkoko

  • O.C. Resident
  • ***
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 171
  • -Received: 269
  • Posts: 918
It does matter. Because at least the company and CEO would get compensated for the lost revenue and damage reputation. Also, it sets a big precedent to news. That if they run with a story that they know is not true. Then they would get sued. I mean $1.6 billion is a lot of money.

Even if you assume they get the full 1.6 billion (which they won't), it's a small drop in the bucket.

Fox's revenue for the last quarter was over 4 billion dollars. They collected over 1.5 billion dollars last quarter just from affiliate fees from cable, satellite and online distributors.

Murdoch sold parts of 21st century fox in 2019 for 71 billion dollars.

1.6 billion is nothing to Fox and Murdoch

Offline eyephone

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 484
  • -Received: 761
  • Posts: 13731
It does matter. Because at least the company and CEO would get compensated for the lost revenue and damage reputation. Also, it sets a big precedent to news. That if they run with a story that they know is not true. Then they would get sued. I mean $1.6 billion is a lot of money.

Even if you assume they get the full 1.6 billion (which they won't), it's a small drop in the bucket.

Fox's revenue for the last quarter was over 4 billion dollars. They collected over 1.5 billion dollars last quarter just from affiliate fees from cable, satellite and online distributors.

Murdoch sold parts of 21st century fox in 2019 for 71 billion dollars.

1.6 billion is nothing to Fox and Murdoch

Is their insurance going to cover this? Or is their behavior negligent that the insurance does not have to cover the lawsuit? Haha
Another thing to consider some policies covers x amount and the rest the company might have to pay. (I do not know the coverage, but it is a reasonable assumption to make.)

It is not just $1.5 billion. Legal fees, sponsors that left (I do not know any that left) which is income.



Offline eyephone

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 484
  • -Received: 761
  • Posts: 13731
Fox News changed the coverage after the election. I want to say around the time they called the state foe Biden to win.
But by then it was too late. Big companies usually have a legal and compliance department. Maybe they should of warned them about this. Idk haha

Offline Liar Loan

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 667
  • -Received: 447
  • Posts: 2079
San Francisco schools oust vice president for ‘harmful’ tweets about Asians
Quote
The vote came less than a week after the school district’s entire senior staff denounced Collins for tweeting in 2016 that Asian American teachers, students and parents had used “white supremacist thinking to assimilate and ‘get ahead.’”

In other tweets, Collins compared Asian Americans to “house n—–s” and invoked stereotypes like “tiger moms,” KPIX reported.



https://nypost.com/2021/03/26/san-francisco-schools-oust-vice-president-for-harmful-tweets/

Offline eyephone

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 484
  • -Received: 761
  • Posts: 13731
As my previous friend that I met in a work conference.  (Keep in mind the atmosphere is free hotel room, free meals and non alcoholic drinks throughout the day, and night time go out with the managers to the bar for free drinks. Layback and fun atmosphere) He would always say when we joke and goof around at the work conference. People are watching, that is clm bro.
I was like what in the world is clm? He told me, %u201CCareer limiting move.%u201D (like it limits the chance to advance or get promoted or might get fired lol) So companies have been doing this long before the cancel culture.

* I think now days people say, HR is watching with cameras. Lol
When the board looks at things it can be a toss up. Usually they ignore it or they recommend to fire the person. (Protect the brand)
« Last Edit: March 27, 2021, 01:23:34 AM by eyephone »

Offline irvinehomeowner

  • The Unicorn Hunter
  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 2640
  • -Received: 3984
  • Posts: 22895
  • 3CWG
Every race has their bad apples. When I was in my early 20s we were getting into an elevator in a parking structure with a couple of Asian guys who you could tell were drinking because their faces were red. It was probably 2am or so. One of the Asian guys looks at me and smiles and says hey Juan. Let’s just say he and his friend learned a tough lesson that night.

Did they get calfed up? :)
Once you go 3-car garage... your junk can never go back.
3CWG: 3-Car Wide Garage
FCB: Foreign Cash Buyer
I recommend:
www.irvinerealtorsite.com
member: Soylent Green Is People (loans/refis)

Offline talkirvine

  • Tourist
  • *
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 6
  • -Received: 4
  • Posts: 96
No, Irvine is in no way the epicenter of violence against Asian. Check out this video below from NYC that has been popular on social media. It is very brutal. I am shocked and very sad that shit like this still happens in the U.S. And what is more despairing is that no one stands out and stop the assault.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1376406876921810946

Offline nosuchreality

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 145
  • -Received: 528
  • Posts: 2434
If you are pro capitalism, can you really blame Fox / MSNBC for figuring out the secret to profitability?

It's a business. They generate more profit by providing contents that catering to a smaller but more devout audience.

News were different 30 years ago not because human nature was different back then.

We just didn't have the tools we have today. Like big data feeding AI driven prediction models etc

Even with the rapid growth of alternative media, this trend is not reversing.

People in general don't care about caveats and nuances.

Haven't we all accepted (maybe unwilling) that proper policy discussion can be had over Twitter post Trump ?

I'm pro-capitalism.  Being pro-capitalism doesn't mean you support doing everything to earn a buck.  It is not capitalism when a corporation is doing the equivalent of knowingly dumping mass quantities of proven carcinogenic toxins in the water supply.

I can excuse some of the behaviors of corporations in the gilded age, they literally did not know the damage their pollution was causing, these corporation do know and actively trying to suppress the information they do know about the harm they are causing.

Offline Kenkoko

  • O.C. Resident
  • ***
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 171
  • -Received: 269
  • Posts: 918
If you are pro capitalism, can you really blame Fox / MSNBC for figuring out the secret to profitability?

It's a business. They generate more profit by providing contents that catering to a smaller but more devout audience.

News were different 30 years ago not because human nature was different back then.

We just didn't have the tools we have today. Like big data feeding AI driven prediction models etc

Even with the rapid growth of alternative media, this trend is not reversing.

People in general don't care about caveats and nuances.

Haven't we all accepted (maybe unwilling) that proper policy discussion can be had over Twitter post Trump ?

I'm pro-capitalism.  Being pro-capitalism doesn't mean you support doing everything to earn a buck.  It is not capitalism when a corporation is doing the equivalent of knowingly dumping mass quantities of proven carcinogenic toxins in the water supply.

I can excuse some of the behaviors of corporations in the gilded age, they literally did not know the damage their pollution was causing, these corporation do know and actively trying to suppress the information they do know about the harm they are causing.

I agree with your stance personally, but you're making a moral argument. It's easy when it's black and white.

When it's a business decision, moral arguments often don't win out. Businesses will weigh the cost of fines & blowbacks vs. the profits of damping mass toxins.

It's a systemic problem of capitalism.

Is that evil? maybe but it's also reality.

I'm saying it'd be more productive if people channel their outrage into changing the system instead of being outraged at CEOs who have every incentive to buck against their moral value.





Offline nosuchreality

  • Certified Irvine Addict
  • ****
  • Thanks
  • -Given: 145
  • -Received: 528
  • Posts: 2434
If you are pro capitalism, can you really blame Fox / MSNBC for figuring out the secret to profitability?

It's a business. They generate more profit by providing contents that catering to a smaller but more devout audience.

News were different 30 years ago not because human nature was different back then.

We just didn't have the tools we have today. Like big data feeding AI driven prediction models etc

Even with the rapid growth of alternative media, this trend is not reversing.

People in general don't care about caveats and nuances.

Haven't we all accepted (maybe unwilling) that proper policy discussion can be had over Twitter post Trump ?

I'm pro-capitalism.  Being pro-capitalism doesn't mean you support doing everything to earn a buck.  It is not capitalism when a corporation is doing the equivalent of knowingly dumping mass quantities of proven carcinogenic toxins in the water supply.

I can excuse some of the behaviors of corporations in the gilded age, they literally did not know the damage their pollution was causing, these corporation do know and actively trying to suppress the information they do know about the harm they are causing.

I agree with your stance personally, but you're making a moral argument. It's easy when it's black and white.

When it's a business decision, moral arguments often don't win out. Businesses will weigh the cost of fines & blowbacks vs. the profits of damping mass toxins.

It's a systemic problem of capitalism.

Is that evil? maybe but it's also reality.

I'm saying it'd be more productive if people channel their outrage into changing the system instead of being outraged at CEOs who have every incentive to buck against their moral value.






It's a systemic problem of groups.  Groups have been shown to take riskier and less ethical decisions.  It's a hazard of distributing accountability. 

I think people should be outraged at the CEOs.  Frankly many of their policies and decisions really are in the out of bounds zone of a clearly differentiated decisions.  They're way over the fuzzy line.  Calling them on it is really the first step in bringing accountability back.   IMHO, Orange jumpsuits are really needed for some of the captains of industry for their behaviors to check the overall runaway egos that are taking hold.

It's a pipe dream though because all the kids want to be social influencers.  Olivia Jade is the poster child of the unethical 'good business decision'.  $500K in USC bribes to create the marketable property generating several million a year.


 

Talk Irvine Links

[Recent Posts]
[FAQ / Rules]

Site Supporters


Recent Posts

Re: Apple New Products by aquabliss
[Today at 02:03:13 AM]


Re: Where the market is - Buyer Offers by USCTrojanCPA
[Today at 12:15:59 AM]


Re: Where the market is - Buyer Offers by USCTrojanCPA
[Today at 12:11:18 AM]


Re: Apple New Products by zovall
[Yesterday at 10:59:08 PM]


Re: Where the market is - Buyer Offers by zovall
[Yesterday at 10:50:44 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2021, SimplePortal