• ShunkW@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    160
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s nothing wrong with hoping an unethical company goes under.

    • joel@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think they’re beyond redemption. My hope is that Linus can take a step back and let the CEO work on improving the workplace culture. No idea if he’s up to the challenge but time will tell

      • FMT99@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Beyond redemption, no, but refusing to acknowledge any wrongdoing doesn’t paint a pretty picture for the future. In the days since I’ve heard “we couldn’t have done any better”, “yes we messed up but it wouldn’t have made any difference if the numbers were right”, “no one could expect us to spend 500 dollars to redo a messed up review”

        Not once did I hear a mea culpa or we’ll try harder to do better in the future. Not a good look.

        • snor10@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Linus:

          That didn’t happen.

          And if it did, it wasn’t that bad.

          And if it was, that’s not a big deal.

          And if it is, that’s not my fault.

          And if it was, I didn’t mean it.

          And if I did, you deserved it.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        After digging into this whole fiasco and it’s various aspects, I’m coming to think that this is a leadership problem, pure and simple, and that the leader that allowed these pretty egregious situations to exist and metastasize is Linus. So sure, good for him for basically bootstrapping a company up to a ~$100M valuation… but that is absolutely not an excuse for, and in no way justifies the internal and external ethical lapses.

        The best case here is if the new LMG CEO forces a sharp, top-down culture shift that enables more sustainable working practices, better employee treatment and culture, increased rigor in the data they present, and an explicit public acknowledgement that their previous high-handed interactions with some creators and brands - and ethical conflicts of interest with others - did, in fact, occur, and will be seriously investigated in the interest of not repeating those failures in the future. But given Linus’s continued “woe is me”/borderline gaslighting, I’ll believe change is coming when I actually see it. For now, I’ve unsubscribed.

    • Jackthelad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      51
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maybe, but spare a thought for the ordinary people who would lose their jobs as a result.

      • Lexi Sneptaur
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        They worked at LMG, a highly visible company. They’ll get other jobs no problem.

        • Jackthelad@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          22
          ·
          1 year ago

          Again, that may be the case, but it’s still not good for people to lose their jobs in the first place.

          Especially not in this economy.

          • Lexi Sneptaur
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I hope every unethical company goes over and everyone who works at all of them remains unemployed for at least 3 months actually. Unethical companies = employees often complacent and part of the problem.

            I don’t see why you want to defend this

            • Jackthelad@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m not defending the company or the actions of whoever is involved in misconduct. But I also don’t believe in guilt by association.

              Sorry for caring about people’s livelihoods.

              • Lexi Sneptaur
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                It isn’t guilt by association. It’s not caring about several people losing their jobs as a result of their employer’s decision to sexually harass women. The few jobs lost isn’t that big of a deal compared to the trauma the female employees were put through. Those people will have no problem finding new work.

      • tabular@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        My thoughts go to the dependency on jobs for survival but that leads into a conversation about AI, the end of enough jobs for humans and the need for universal basic income. Job loss doesn’t much affect my choice to interact with a corporation or wish for it to change (which may affect jobs).

    • trachemys@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      76
      ·
      1 year ago

      They seem to have an excess of testosterone and are too sloppy, but unethical and worthy of cancellation is typical internet outrage over reaction.

      • ShunkW@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        Being invested in a company and giving glowing reviews to their products and only offering critiques of their competitors is pretty fucking unethical