Say wha-

Are you just shilling for corpos or something? What exactly are you talking about.

That’s exactly what this is. Trying to seek the truth while they spin false narratives. And you’re siding with the people who are literally just professional false narrators. Sowing doubt about unflattering stories is literally a PR person’s main job. And you’re saying “well, they denied it! Why is this a story?” It just makes no sense. Unfortunately, right now it’s just the word of an employee vs the word of the PR person. Which is exactly—I might add—the way the no bathroom breaks thing started. You’re just deciding to give the corp the benefit of the doubt. I’m choosing to believe the believable story about them being awful (as the company has proven to be over and over and over.)

How exactly does my just happening to believe the employee over the PR person “confuse people about the real issues” and “actively discredit” myself and “create a false reality.” Like, for real, it seems like you’re spinning PR right now. But you’re just bad at it.

Who does it serve? It serves the workers when articles like this come out and an outcry prompts an investigation or more interest in the story so further reporting is done to find the truth. I’d say spreading rumors about vampiric, abusive companies is a-ok in my book. They still have a stranglehold on shopping. If we have to play dirty to take them down a few pegs, so be it.

But this is also kinda besides the point. Because I don’t even think that’s what’s happening here. A reporter got info saying one thing, and the person whose job it is to protect the company from their own misdeeds and to professionally cast doubt in favor of their bottom line says exactly what they’re paid to say. So I’m more inclined to believe the person who found evidence enough to post a story, rather than the person whose job it is to protect and lie for the company. Yeah, it’s a person who claims to have worked there and quit, but this is the first report. I think it says way more about the veracity that the company had to send out their PR team to start denying a worker’s story online.

They’re literally the spin team. They deny true reporting in order to protect the company’s image—they just say it in specific ways to obscure the truth. Their presence almost means the exact opposite of the words coming out of their mouth. If they weren’t doing this, they wouldn’t just send out some stern words saying “we would never!” They would give info to show they’re monitoring for X and Y, and that wouldn’t cover singing in the car.

“PR spokesperson said he company is great and would never do something ghoulish. Why aren’t we believing them?”

I get that skepticism is good and healthy. But at what point does a person or organization lose the benefit of the doubt? I’m more liable to believe some story about Amazon abusing its employees than I would be to assume they’re innocent.

They denied the peeing in bottles thing too. And denying their warehouse employees bathroom breaks. Turns out they weren’t “denying” the, bathroom breaks, but building a structure that basically eliminates employees’ time to do so. The rule probably isn’t “no singing in the car.” It’s probably “we are monitoring you to make sure you aren’t talking on the phone or performing other work while we pay you. Bonus side effect: employees can’t sing along to music. Look at what he spokesperson said. “We have never Prohibited singing in vehicles.” Subtext: we never explicitly said that. Doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.

Thought the same thing

People were less educated back then. They didn’t realize that you were supposed to dig your heels in and the more opposition you get—from experts, humanists, caring volunteers who dedicate their lives to helping the disenfranchised people you hate—means you should only think what you think harder, louder, and more in everyone’s face. Crazy to see how far we’ve come.

It’s not that they are victims. They are just useful idiots whose idiotic idiot views aligned with the political goals of Russia.

I feel like the more workers are generally miserable, the more they’ll be disgruntled

Ken Paxton wants you to give him sugar. In water.

~go for speed~

Gary, Indiana

Honestly, this is a thing I’ve only seen in the past few years. I think, over time, what used to be “men can’t find the G spot” turned into “men can’t find the clit,” and I genuinely believe this just came from a misunderstanding about them being different parts.

It’s like how “literally” turned into meaning “figuratively”

Man, how do you guys survive an ad-unfiltered internet?