|
David Heinrich posted:Like I said, it was mostly just the sheer vitriolic outrage that surprised me. The "How could Marvel possibly partner with such an evil corporation?! They're abandoning their core values." When they've been partnered with Coca Cola for years is a patently nonsensical thing to say that just refuses to acknowledge that Marvel has always been this sort of company, in my eyes. If partnering with Grumman is too far for some people, I can accept that. What I can't accept, at least without a bit of an odd look, is that sort of disgust and surprise like it's just out of nowhere or somehow any different from what they've always done. This is my theory: Decades of discovering that Actually Even Seemingly Innocuous Corporations Are Nefarious Money Vampires has given the public a general cynicism and suspicion that every product or company ultimately represents cavalcades of unimaginable human suffering perpetrated by sociopathic profit hounds in business suits. As a result, most modern PR tends to be geared towards convincing people that a business isn't evil; buzzwords such as "locally sourced" "organic" "small batch" have mainly become attempts to signal that the company cares about the the way they do business and isn't trying to poison you, cut corners at the expense of the consumer's health, or outsource its production to third world child slaves. However, the extent to which the public acts on that suspicion seems to largely depend on image. As you say, Northrop-Grumman does not manufacture consumer products and thus hasn't needed to invest in PR. This, coupled with the mildly common usage of weapons contractors and war profiteers as vile Snidely Whiplash bastard villains in your Iron Mans and Metal Gears Solid and Calls of Duty and Die Hards and whatnot and the fact that Grumman does actually manufacture weapons to kill people in a very real and direct sense violently orients public opinion against them. Compare this to Nestle and Coca-Cola, who mostly only suffer drubbings in token news articles and documentaries, and who invest in the aforementioned apologist marketing ("Made with REAL cane sugar!!!") - this is where the cognitive dissonance comes from, I think. Most people will acknowledge the belief or suspicion that those companies are villainous meat grinders fed by human suffering but will not act against them to the same degree absent a greater spark.
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 14:17 |
|
|
Blockhouse posted:God, you have to be a joke account, right? If you're not a joke account then you're a joke person and I don't know which is real anymore. I think that, like a lot of other twentysomethings that hang around political discussions on the internet, what was once intended to be an ironic facade for expressing unironic opinions without paying the social price has devolved into simple shitbag posting
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2017 02:01
|
|