Slashdot Mirror
Too Much Corporate Power?
This feeling, says the BW/Harris Poll survey, is amplified by the Net, "and the discontented who use it." It provides an early-warning system that approximates Paul Revere, says the magazine, a way to spread the word about the latest corporate outrage.
"With the Internet, information comes instantly," says Harvard University labor economist Richard B. Freeman, "so even if we don't have more people concerned about companies, those who can do more about it."
And we do have more people concerned about companies, it appears.
The Net seems awash in corporatist machinations. C-Net and other online news services read more like the National Law Journal every day, as the rise of Open Source programming and other trends -- copyright, privacy issues, a nascent movement for social responsibility -- pit the tech culture squarely against closed business practices and the runaway corporate growth that's accelerated dramatically since the 80s, then jumped dramatically again with the explosion of the Net and the Web.
The rushed, sometimes panicky entry of large corporations into a culture which is at heart architecturally open and markedly individualistic seems at times like a cultural civil war. Legal conflicts now seem to outstrip technological experimentation, advances and breakthroughs, lawyers getting as rich off the Net as they do in product liability or malpractice suits. Links are now a continuing legal battleground. Recently motion picture companies got a court order barring 2600 Enterprises from linking to sites containing DeCSS code, but that's just one item in a continuing litany of encroachment. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints asked for and received a court order prohibiting a church critic from linking to copyrighted handbooks. Mattel, which makes Cyberpatrol blocking software, took legal action after the cphack.exe program revealed Cyberpatrol's list of blocked Web sites.
Then of course there are the ongoing free-music and file-sharing fights, Amazon's efforts to copyright software and Microsoft's legal threats demanding the removal of links (on Slashdot, among other places) to its Kerberos code. Just wait till AOL and Time Warner link up. Thousands of Net-related actions are pending, and most are less about technology than corporate power. The Net evolved free of corporate and government control, but corporations and governments are racing to catch up.
In the Business Week survey, Americans gave business credit for the economic good times that have prevailed during the 90s. But the public is also becoming increasingly alarmed at corporate ethics, practices and power.
Nearly 40% of Americans surveyed said they thought profits were more important to corporations than making safe, reliable products. Only 6% said they thought large businesses treated their employees well, and just 8% said companies did a good job of educating consumers about health and safety issues related to their products.
74% said big companies have too much political influence, and more than 80% agreed that entertainment and popular culture are dominated by corporate money which seeks mass appeal over quality.
The Net is not only a prime battleground for the rising tensions between corporations and the public, it's also becoming the primary vehicle for anti-corporatist activists who have little voice in mainstream media.
Protests against Wal-Mart have erupted in more than 100 American cities, and issues ranging from the open distribution of technology to globalism to artistic control of culture to genetically altered food were cited in the survey. Without the news-spreading power of the Net, many of these efforts would probably have faltered.
The survey suggests that Americans are finally getting upset at their unchecked power and are coming to believe -- with amazing unanimity -- that large corporations need to be more responsible, ethical and regulated.
More than 95% of the survey's participants said they agreed with this statement:
"U.S. crporations should have more than one purpose. They also owe something to their workers and the communities in which they operate, and they should sometimes sacrifice some profit for the sake of making things better for their workers and communities."
This noble sentiment fails to take into account the proprietary and predatory nature of the contemporary global corporation. These companies have only one purpose. They are run by coalitions of analysts, stockholders, investors and executives whose overriding mission is to mass-market products, dominate markets and -- in the end -- maximize profits. There isn't a single CEO of a major corporation who wouldn't get fired in a flash if he or she decided to forego profits in favor of workers or community.
This conflict between an individual, entrepeneurial spirit and surging corporatism is the single most significant political conflict on the Net. And if the Net is, in fact, fostering a political/social movement designed to protest, curb or transform corporatism, that could well be the most significant and unexpected contribution to public life that technology has made since e-mail.
When people complain about the government, I have to point out that we, not them, are the government. If there's a government problem, it's because I elected the wrong person.
Well...I don't really agree with that. We don't have many options to elect the right person. How many of our elections are between only two candidates? I live in New York. The senate primaries were yesterday, and guess what, Hilary Clinton won the Democratic Primary and Rick Lazio won the Republican Primary. I never ever HEARD of anyone challenging them. For the past month they've been running ads against each other, they both effectively ignored the primaries.
It's also difficult for anyone from the majority of the american public to achieve a high-ranking elected government position. This is a generalization, but most people don't have the resources or the abilities to run for a seat in the house, or the senate.
To a great extent, we are the corporate power. Never before in American history has so much money been invested in the stock market by so many people. We own our oppressor.
This isn't really accurate. You say that never before...has so much money been invested. This is probably accurate. However, most of that money is in the hands of a small percentage of the population. Because of the stock market's incredible success and so many companies having incredibly increases in their stock price, our culture has shifted so that to the outside observer it would seem that everyone is investing in the stock market, simply because of media saturation. You can't watch prime time television without seeing a myriad of investment ads. But the simply fact is most of the people in the country don't have the money or the time to spend investing in the stock market.
Don't mind me, I just hate wallstreet. I find it incredibly galling that a small number of people who pump money into our corporations dictate how those corporations run. (side note, I'm interning at Xerox right now...it's messed up, wallstreet is dumb. That's all I can say.)
Moller
Almost all corporate power has been based on one of 4 things: a patent, a copywrite, a trademark, or a trade secret.
I disagree. IP is a mere drop in the bucket - but it happens to be the drop that hits you on the head because of where you work and live.
Corporate power (and abuse of said power) easily extends to destruction, litigation, slavery, injury, and death without an IP issue in sight.
Keep the big picture in mind and IP in perspective - I'm not saying IP practises "aren't that bad really", if anything I'm suggesting that you overlook the sheer magnitude of corporate filth, due to the overwhelming disgusting vastness of the fraction of it that is in your direct view.
One problem is that corporations have been given the same rights as the individual. Before we can take our governments back, we need to change the laws and 'crack the corporate I.' There is an interesting article in the July/August issue of adbusters, which is also available here
Oh, and there is an interesting site on what can happen when a corporation gains too much power, as is the case with Shell-Nigeria.
Everyone has a right to be concerned about how powerful corporations have grown. Just a few bits of food for thought.
-as
What Future?
Nearly 40% of Slashdot posters surveyed said they thought karma was more important to posting than making intelligent, useful points. Only 6% said they thought posters with large amounts of karma treated their fellow posters well, and just 8% said posters did a good job of educating posters about real information related to the topic.
74% said karma whores have too much influence on Slashdot, and more than 80% agreed that slashdot comments are dominated by trollers which seek mass appeal over quality.
The Net is not only a prime battleground for the rising tensions between karma whores and trollers, it's also becoming the primary vehicle for communists who have little voice in mainstream software development houses.
Protests against DeCSS have erupted in more than 100 American mirrors, and issues ranging from the open distribution of technology to globalism to artistic control of culture to iMacs were cited in the survey. Without the news-spreading power of the Net, many of these efforts would probably have faltered.
The survey suggests that slashdot posters are finally getting upset at their unchecked power and are coming to believe -- with amazing unanimity
-- that karma whores need to be more responsible, ethical and regulated.
More than 95% of the survey's participants said they agreed with this statement:
"Karma whores should have more than one purpose. They also owe something to their moderators and the communities in which they operate, and they should sometimes sacrifice some karma for the sake of making things better for their moderators and communities."
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
When people complain about the government, I have to point out that we, not them, are the government. If there's a government problem, it's because I elected the wrong person.
To a great extent, we are the corporate power. Never before in American history has so much money been invested in the stock market by so many people. We own our oppressor.
The same people who claim Microsoft is a monopoly have stock in Microsoft. The same people who think that Wal-Mart is homogenizing America in an effort to mute culture and get us to buy more Britney Sprears CDs are the same people who rode the stock from $10 in 1991 to more than $55 this year.
Sure, AOL ruined the internet, but they did it while making people such as you and me rich in the process.
Corporations exist to make money. I'll be the first to agree with that. But we forget that they aren't making money for themselves. They are making money for their shareholders. If you don't like a company, don't buy its product but do buy its shares. Become and owner and change the way it operates.
There will be some who say that the average stock owner has no effect on the company as a whole. Before you tell me that, tell me how much your vote will mean in the next election. Tell me if your vote is wasted.
We have met the enemy and he is us.
InitZero