Jimmy claims that 10% would have gone otherwise into the hands of unproductive advertising people. And he instead puts it into the wages jobs in charity. but does all that 10% go to charity, no part of it is guilt money it would have gone in my pocket if I had gone to a cheaper company. He argues advertising money is wasted, but ethical corps waste money compared to bottom line corps.
I'drather shop at a non-ethical supermarket than the ethical COOP cos overall the result is better for society is I don't go with the COP
If I buy programming services off Janey a woman in Ghana she gets cash, but then Jimmy says I should buy off him cos he will 10% of his profits to people like Janey Yeh well of course people like Janey need money cos she doesn't have a job.
I don't support charity except those that hold governments to account, cos all too often charities are even more corrupt than businesses or government, they are too vulnerable to hijack from within by people with their own agenda and are not democratically accountable like politicians, but at the same time consider themselves above the law and courts
Em is "Jimmy Wales fronts a corp giving 10% to charity" a tech story ?
it's not new idea.. always been such business
it's a tech celebrity story, which Jimmy is riding for free publicity It tells me nothing new about a social revolution cos he offers no evidence.
It is however a useful vehicle for asking Jimmy about corruption in Wikipedia
Hey what about Wikipedia spin by unaccountable activists ?
Gareth mentioned the recent problem highighted in the Guardian about commercial spin in Wikipedia paid articles and PR firms writing articles. This is serious, but at least the law can be aspplied to them. What Gareth didn't mention is a far bigger problem of activists policing Wikipedia to their own political agenda cos they consider themselves above the law in 2009 one UK was banned for 6 months after adjusting climate articles 5000 times, he was then reinstated after 6 months. But today activists are there all the time inserting spin. When Haiyan happened they were their trying to hype it as a climate change event , but no real scientific evidence can be offered.
"Jimmy I save 10% on advertising"
me "no I'll go with what's cheapest"
JW "what, you don't trust me ?"
Me "Jimmy give me the 10% off then I can give it direct to charity. what you don't trust me ?"
No, from experience I don't trust "ethical businesses"
I bank with the COOP they got infiltrated by green activists who made it into UKs largest lender to windfarms, donated money to anti-fracking propaganda campaigns and activists, and allowed the bank to bankrupt itself.. andvtheir supermarket is bad aswell with activists ethics rather than mine.