[dkingsf]

in the post above you go into details of children being mutilated and raped because of the smartphone industry and then you just turn the blind eye towards it even though this horrifies you...

But it's OK Matt. He did say he gave some money to help them.

[johnenglish]

To a lot of people this stuff is important. They research a company's "corporate responsibility score" before doing business with them or buying their products. Look at Apple, a few years ago Greenpeace criticized them for have a very modern company image yet they weren't being proactive when it came to the chemicals they use in making their products. Apple changed some of their policies and annouced a "greener Apple".

The takeaway is that this kind of stuff is becoming more and more important to people and it's not going to change. Would I based my purchasing decisions solely on corporate responsibility? No. That said, if I had a choice between two products and one was actually better for the environment and the price difference wasn't prohibitive I'd buy it.

[i7guy]

It's a waste of time and money to be aware of the human and environmental toll a company takes on creating your product? Seriously? Could you be more entitled? Some of these companies use labor with unfair practices in factories with obscene suicide rates. All of our beloved cell companies use products in their chips from a region that is rife with rape, murder, torture and mutilations as all factions struggle to control the resources. There are other materials they could use but it would cost more. You can call being aware of stuff like that "liberal crap" or whatever you said but in my opinion willfully not knowing or contemplating these facts when you make your choices is based on a sad sense of entitlement and an obviously lazy existence.

90% of the products imported in the US could be manufactured by companies with unfair labor practices. Then again the USPS has it's share of issues, so we need to start here at home.

So you can either turn a blind eye, become an advocate or live in the hills and get out of the rat race.

[i7guy]

What a stupid post, seriously

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Pot, kettle thing...seriously.

[BBThemes]

To a lot of people this stuff is important. They research a company's "corporate responsibility score" before doing business with them or buying their products. Look at Apple, a few years ago Greenpeace criticized them for have a very modern company image yet they weren't being proactive when it came to the chemicals they use in making their products. Apple changed some of their policies and annouced a "greener Apple".

The takeaway is that this kind of stuff is becoming more and more important to people and it's not going to change. Would I based my purchasing decisions solely on corporate responsibility? No. That said, if I had a choice between two products and one was actually better for the environment and the price difference wasn't prohibitive I'd buy it.

yet look at the conditions of the workers in their factorys at apple, its not so good. dont get me wrong this kind of stuff is important, but ultimately `best` is a totally subjective point.

also iv gotta say the `general public` arent that bothered with it, for example in 3 years of selling phones, its always been `whats the apps like?` `hows the battery life?` and stuff like that, iv never once been asked anything other than about operating the phone, which shows the average consumer wants whats good for them.

also before the `green` credential gets thrown around, the toyota prius is a `green` car, extremely enviorment friendly, apart form the fact its battery travels almost twice around the world before it hits the car itself, you`d have to look at the suppliers of all the parts of any equipment if your ever going to throw a `green` (or any other) label on the finished product.

[_StephenBB81]

also before the `green` credential gets thrown around, the toyota prius is a `green` car, extremely enviorment friendly, apart form the fact its battery travels almost twice around the world before it hits the car itself, you`d have to look at the suppliers of all the parts of any equipment if your ever going to throw a `green` (or any other) label on the finished product.

There was a Show done about "How Green are Hybrids" and apparently before the Prius starts to do ANYTHING green for the world it must drive 400,000 miles, to make up for the added carbon footprint for making it, and the amount required to dispose of the car when finished compared to an equal size gas car

[qbnkelt]

Intense.
On the article, it's laughable. On the issue of political, social and environmental responsibility, it not all or nothing. You do what you can to make a difference - whether it's recycling, buying locally grown food, becoming involved in animal rescue....whatever. I have six border collies, five of which are rescues. I bought one golden retriever puppy after I lost my partner, my German Shepherd Thor, because I was looking for one with the correct temperament for search and rescue, I did what I could. I grow a lot of my produce and I buy from my neighbours. I recently donated about two dozen phones to AT&T's program to get them to soldiers and to a local women's shelter. I donate to certain causes.
But I ain't giving up my Blackberry. Not as long as it makes me happy.

[diapers]

I love my Torch but how can you say GoodGuide's criteria for social and environmental responsibility are not valid or on point, when the article does not say what the criteria were? You may think social responsibility is "liberal crap" and you are entitled to your opinion, but many people care about the blood and sweat that goes into the products they buy and try to act responsibility when they can. I for one will be interested in reading how GoodGuide arrived at their ratings when the full report is released on Thursday, instead of dismissing their criteria before knowing what they are.

They admit themselves they didn't have any consensus or guidelines for making up these scores. I find the article completely useless.

[janos2808]

They admit themselves they didn't have any consensus or guidelines for making up these scores.

Where do they admit that? I didn't see anything vaguely similar to that in the article. For an overview of the guidelines, see About GoodGuide and GoodGuide Ratings | GoodGuide

[iN8ter]

Pretty laughable if I say so myself, and I'm not even referring to RIM's last place position. Just look at Nokia up top. That's a joke. And Apple isn't even in the top 5 yet Pantech is?? I'm sorry I even gave this site a hit.

Keep in mind that Smartphones are only like 30% of the Global Market. 70% of people are still using Dumb or Feature Phones.

Taking this knowledge, put things into perspective...

EDIT: And yes, before I posted I was aware that this above poster misinterpreted the linked content.

[Duvi]

Pretty laughable if I say so myself, and I'm not even referring to RIM's last place position. Just look at Nokia up top. That's a joke. And Apple isn't even in the top 5 yet Pantech is?? I'm sorry I even gave this site a hit.

i'm glad i read your post first

[barrist]

Seriously, like Qbnkelt said, it doesn't have to be all or nothing.

All of us can do what we can to make things a bit better. We all know we can't live in the forest off nature and avoid some of the shady practices companies make. But perhaps if we all agreed that factories shouldn't have conditions so bad that people often commit suicide, that's a good starting point.

Maybe this rating motivates RIM to better their practices? Aside from some of the seemingly indifferent people here, there are alot people that do care about this stuff and could impact their future purchases.

[barrist]

IMOH, I think the whole premise of using social and environmental factors to judge a is irresponsible journalism. Choosing a device or company or anything but how well the device performs, what it offers, and what effect purchasing the device on your wallet is wasting time and money.

How the **** is it irresponsible journalism? They said explicitly right in the article what the ranking was based on.

I hope your children don't die of lead poisoning because you chose the cheapest toys from China.

[i7guy]

Seriously, like Qbnkelt said, it doesn't have to be all or nothing.

All of us can do what we can to make things a bit better. We all know we can't live in the forest off nature and avoid some of the shady practices companies make. But perhaps if we all agreed that factories shouldn't have conditions so bad that people often commit suicide, that's a good starting point.

Maybe this rating motivates RIM to better their practices? Aside from some of the seemingly indifferent people here, there are alot people that do care about this stuff and could impact their future purchases.

Maybe if the govt made an environment friendly to manufacturing we could have these plants within our borders and these situations wouldn't exist. But I digress.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com