The public reaction is what scares them. They are entirely disconnected from the consequences their actions impose on the public and can't imagine why their "customers" would be cheering the death of their peer. They don't think Brian Thompson did anything wrong, maximizing shareholder value is a noble goal after all, so from their perspective the public just seems bloodthirsty.
this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2024
343 points (98.0% liked)
News
31410 readers
2509 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Are we not?
I am.
Reminds me of finding out the taco bell executive used the phrase 'thinking outside the bun' in the I actual work correspondences.
To function in a big huge corporate c-suite level you must drink the cool-aid.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Signs around NYC.
so they're going to spend a whole bunch of the companies money on security firms, it's definitely going to come out of the executive compensation and not the workers, right? .....right?
Owners have to make these officers feel secure again... so we will pay for the security... they can't have their comp cut just because some hero murdered their peer.
Good
I'm pretty sure that was part of the point.
Legally, the murder was wrong. Full stop. There's no legal argument here that it wasn't. It may not have been the guy they caught, but someone was murdered and legally that's wrong.
Morally though, it's a lot more gray. It's pretty easy to prove that health insurers policies have literally been killing people thousands of people a year at at a minimum and even if it's legal for some reason, that's also still morally wrong. Attacking someone who's attacking other people is usually called defending.
The CEO was on his way to implement policies that would kill thousands of people, and injure tens of thousands.
I see no moral gray area.
load more comments
(12 replies)
Legally, the murder was wrong. Full stop.
True but this was self defense. I don't see murder. Murder is the terminology of the regime who is trying to pin some crime on him that I don't see.
load more comments
(7 replies)
When peaceful and effective protest are a choose1, gotta go with effective. If anything, it seems to me to be little different to the trolley problem.
load more comments
(4 replies)
"forcing leaders to ask themselves uncomfortable questions about their own preparedness for a threat landscape that appears far more serious than many realized just a week ago."
It's probably even more serious than they think it is right now too.
In fact, all I see are talks of securing these executives. And as the article points out, security is a sunk cost. There is no financial gain. That means as security gets more expensive, they will have to weigh how to afford it versus the problems they cause.
Fear isn't the word I think we want though, fear seems too normal. Terror sounds closer to what they likely need to feel before things get better.
This is exactly my thought. C-levels are going to want competent security and not Rent A Cops, which costs. Companies which provide those services already charge a decent chunk of change for it, and the rates will likely go through the roof now. Additionally, I think they'll find that these "security consultants" will suggest absolutely unacceptable lifestyle changes for them to minimize areas of concern. Much easier to secure a house than a whole nightclub, or golf course.
Also, I am assuming a lot of grade A security are SOF types who fought in two stupid wars on behalf of owner class.
Makes you wonder how a person like that would feel about a dead parasite him or her self
Hmmm
Would they really care to take a bullet for a parasite?
There is really no way to tell, sadly.
load more comments
(2 replies)
If you listen to the news segment, it talks about security completely and not about chnaging the corporate zeitgeist around the priority balance between workers, customers, and shareholders.
Hear that whooshing sound?
Right? No introspection at all. I doubt the C-suite of Patagonia sees a need to increase security.
The revolution will not be televised
It's sort of funny. All they are going to do is isolate the bastards into doing even more corrupt shit.
They really refuse to believe that the first part of finding out, is fucking around.
The more they fuck around and put profit ahead of everything, the more finding out I imagine is going to occur.
“There are reports that girls are fawning over this guy. This level of notoriety risks triggering copycats. And let’s face it, some business leaders are ~~vulnerable~~ complete fucking ass bags”
Fixed that for em
If somebody's got the itch and just has to go shoot up something this is a way, way better thing to copycat than school shooters.
Amazing how we all can agree on this one simple thing....
Clean denial of claim to life to executives is socially acceptable
There's a lot of angry lonely men out there.
If there's anything that will motivate someone to kill it's the potential that women might give them attention.
Good, good.
People creating barbaric conditions are afraid of barbarians?
Probably more fear from seeing how the public at large has reacted.
Healthcare is the target now but who’s next?
Nope, insurance is finance. They don’t actually provide health care services.
Calling insurance healthcare is journalistic malpractice. Get better at your craft or get shit on.
I mean, when you've been actively supressing wages for decades so that you can keep your employees in debt to make them more subservient, you also kind of create a powderkeg of resentment and ill will. They really thought there would never be a spark?
Good. I hope they feel the need to look over their shoulders every two seconds. I hope they lie awake in bed at night questioning every noise outside. I hope they'll home cook every meal themselves from now on.
As scared as someone denied necessary medical therapy, surgery, prescriptions?
view more: next ›