I mean, would you rather corporations not donate to non-profits? If you think this issue means corporations donating to non-profits is a net-negative and that attitude becomes prevalent, then they will stop doing it. I’m sure companies like Apple would rather keep the money if it isn’t buying them good will.
I don’t assume that. I’m just saying what is considered good is controversial and political some times, so companies trying to offer a generic matching program will find themselves stuck in the middle. This is a position they don’t want to be in because they’re likely to just piss off someone they don’t want to piss off on either side, when all they were trying to do was match donations, which was a business they got in to because they were trying to do some “good.” If it ends up attracting more negative attention than positive attention, they’ll just stop doing it. I mean who wants to give away money for free if it is just going to make people hate you?
Apple never gives out money for free. In this case what they wanted to get was goodwill, and now it’s backfiring. Calling them out is the right thing to do IMO, they had zero intentions of “doing good”.
They do not choose which non-profit to donate to, their employees do and they match. And it’s not just Apple, thousands of companies use Benevity and are also matching employee donations. It’s a pretty standard thing, so calling out Apple specifically is misleading. It sounds like in your view you’d rather that no company match any donations at all because you disagree with some of the 501c3s that exist.
Is it mandatory for US businesses to have this donation match program, or was it apples choice?
I mean, would you rather corporations not donate to non-profits? If you think this issue means corporations donating to non-profits is a net-negative and that attitude becomes prevalent, then they will stop doing it. I’m sure companies like Apple would rather keep the money if it isn’t buying them good will.
I’m not sure how your scale works, but to me you’re still a killer if you kill one guy and help 3 others.
Also you seem to assume that anything that’s non-profit is good. Its not about the profit, it’s about what they do.
I don’t assume that. I’m just saying what is considered good is controversial and political some times, so companies trying to offer a generic matching program will find themselves stuck in the middle. This is a position they don’t want to be in because they’re likely to just piss off someone they don’t want to piss off on either side, when all they were trying to do was match donations, which was a business they got in to because they were trying to do some “good.” If it ends up attracting more negative attention than positive attention, they’ll just stop doing it. I mean who wants to give away money for free if it is just going to make people hate you?
Apple never gives out money for free. In this case what they wanted to get was goodwill, and now it’s backfiring. Calling them out is the right thing to do IMO, they had zero intentions of “doing good”.
Source: me, an apple fanboy since Apple II
They do not choose which non-profit to donate to, their employees do and they match. And it’s not just Apple, thousands of companies use Benevity and are also matching employee donations. It’s a pretty standard thing, so calling out Apple specifically is misleading. It sounds like in your view you’d rather that no company match any donations at all because you disagree with some of the 501c3s that exist.