Because of my job I see a lot of factories from the tech industry and most, if not all, are trying to reduce their impact. Some of them are doing it out of virtue, other because at the end of the day it’s cheaper for them to produce and some are doing it because it looks good on paper and attracts investors.
Now, the factories that I work with sell in countries where standards and regulations are tight, so take this with a grain of salt.
This is not an article, this is a press release. It is written by Apple employees.
I didn’t say they were lying. If anything the much more likely scenario is that it is framed in a duplicitous manner but without explicitly lying (in the strict pedantic sense).
Here is a simple question one for you. Find me where Apple provides a clear explanation of their definition of “gross emissions - Manufacturing (purchased goods and services)”; this is the line item that’s key to their press release, everything else is fluff and holds no value when it comes to the bigger picture.
Do you not understand the difference between a press release and an article? Are you being serious? The authors literally have apple email accounts.
How is what I said a strawman? What exactly am I “strawmanning”; could you please be clear and specific on this?
There is no bias. This is common sense. Corporate messaging around sustainability (and there are different brands of this) by definition cannot be trusted.
Can you show me how they define “gross emissions - Manufacturing (purchased goods and services)”, surely if they added it in their emissions table and it’s really the only piece that’s important (because it ties back to the “60% of 2015 claim”, everything else in the press release is fluff), you should be able to find the definition as per Apple?
Removed by mod
Because of my job I see a lot of factories from the tech industry and most, if not all, are trying to reduce their impact. Some of them are doing it out of virtue, other because at the end of the day it’s cheaper for them to produce and some are doing it because it looks good on paper and attracts investors.
Now, the factories that I work with sell in countries where standards and regulations are tight, so take this with a grain of salt.
Removed by mod
Seems to me they responded to
Which, according to them, they are.
Keep in mind, there is a very large probability that much of the content in the press release is misleading and de facto untrue.
Why would you ever take a corporate press release at face value?
Removed by mod
This is not an article, this is a press release. It is written by Apple employees.
I didn’t say they were lying. If anything the much more likely scenario is that it is framed in a duplicitous manner but without explicitly lying (in the strict pedantic sense).
Here is a simple question one for you. Find me where Apple provides a clear explanation of their definition of “gross emissions - Manufacturing (purchased goods and services)”; this is the line item that’s key to their press release, everything else is fluff and holds no value when it comes to the bigger picture.
Removed by mod
Do you not understand the difference between a press release and an article? Are you being serious? The authors literally have apple email accounts.
How is what I said a strawman? What exactly am I “strawmanning”; could you please be clear and specific on this?
There is no bias. This is common sense. Corporate messaging around sustainability (and there are different brands of this) by definition cannot be trusted.
Can you show me how they define “gross emissions - Manufacturing (purchased goods and services)”, surely if they added it in their emissions table and it’s really the only piece that’s important (because it ties back to the “60% of 2015 claim”, everything else in the press release is fluff), you should be able to find the definition as per Apple?
I honestly expect our ruling regime to attack and punish them for this. I’m not exaggerating.