• Jyek@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    90% on consumers? I don’t know I’d go that far… If a company is evil but provides a service people still desire, that doesn’t make the evil company being evil the fault of the consumers. Like saying gun control in America is resisted primarily by its citizens when we are well aware that company lobbying is mostly at fault and most citizens are actually for some amount of gun control.

    • the_q@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Anyone who supports a company knowing how they conduct their business causes harm etc, is complicit. Once that information is learned a choice has to be made.

      • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That only works if there’s meaningful competition. With megabrands like Nestle who make 1/4 of the grocery store, or game publishers like Ubisoft who receive 1/4 of the industry’s revenue any kind of boycott is dead before it begins.

        In a society with a functioning government, megabrands who abuse their neighbors and/or customers would be hit with significant fines and be heavily regulated out of the bad behaviors, but the US hadn’t had a government interested in helping the common person for over half a century

    • Texas_Hangover@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Way to shoehorn your opinions on gun control into a thread about forced ads in video games. If we ask nicely, will you share your thoughts about Trump as well?