This is not China. Actually, it’s Wisconsin and the closest image I’ve got to what I think rural China might look like.
I stumbled upon another article about Apple and Foxconn that might amplify what Mike Daisey said in the This American Life episode #454. It’s from yesterday’s New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/business/ieconomy-apples-ipad-and-the-human-costs-for-workers-in-china.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2&partner=rss&emc=rss&src=igw
It brings up a slightly different bit of investigative journalism in a 7-page article with an attached video. And, for me, it brought up a concept I GOT to the core in the est Training in 1976: “You can live your life taking responsibility for everything by choosing it or you can take responsibility for nothing and live your life being the victim.” Applying that to the Foxconn/Apple issue, as an iPad user, I’ve got a couple of choices: I chose the coolest device on the planet AND I’m also choosing to face the ‘human costs’ associated with it as well as the monetary costs. Put another way, I’m responsible for buying it (paying off my credit card bill) AND I’m responsible for the man who lost his life in the explosion. The criticism in the Daisey piece and the NYT piece is really against those who either choose to buy it but not acknowledge the human costs or those who design and manufacture it but do not acknowledge the human cost.
What came out loud and clear to me in both pieces is that Apple (first Steve Jobs and now Tim Rice) are taking responsibility for ALL of it. They could have so easily looked the other way and hired mega PR people to spin the story, rationalize the loses, etc.
Think this is a black and white issue? Imagine being in business and designing a new product, going to someone who is capable of manufacturing that product. Your stockholders expect you to deliver a killer product on time and for a price that will cause it to sell like hot cakes and still deliver a profit. The manufacturer gets your money, buy the supplies, hires the skilled and unskilled labor to produce it which necessarily includes managers and foremen who are in charge of the laborers. The manufacturer also has owners (stockholders) who expect a profit and a good reputation which will drive more business their way. The workers want to do well so they can keep their jobs, improve their families, etc. Sometimes the only way they can do that is to work harder, faster, longer.
I did a rambling response to the NYT article, but by waiting a few days, I deleted most of that because CNET’s professional wordsmiths and journalists did a better job at: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57367320-37/apple-foxconn-tale-goes-well-beyond-apple-and-tech/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20 if you are interested in following the story.
Without talking about brand names so much, I’d be interested in your discussion of the larger issues involved, like:
What is a bargain?
What does ‘Buy American’ really mean?
What’s the difference between the words ‘cost’, ‘value’ and ‘price’?