The problem with Greenpeace

Nevermind the 2 tons of PC parts behind her...When I was eight my friends and I planned to build a tank. None of us told our mothers why or how we would do this tank project, but once we had it there was no doubt we would be the kings of the neighborhood. We got a bunch of old tires together, broke scissors cutting the treads out, and planned to wrap them around some discarded wheel wells. We gathered wood from an abandoned house development to build the frame, which then we could nail sheet metal too. Then it hit us, we really had no idea how to build a real tank. We had to abort the project in favor of hide and seek for the rest of the afternoon.

Which is exactly my problem with Greenpeace. To rate a company based on the tank they might build over the tank they produce is ridiculous. If anyone can take them seriously, then this green scorecard of theirs needs to be based on facts not promises. Which is why Apple got into the spat they did with them, because the company prefers to promote things they accomplish over things they promise. This policy, as aggravating as it might be at times, keeps Apple out of trouble. I mean, would you like Michael Dell if he kept flipping the switch on distributing Linux? Of course not, which is one of many reasons I am not their customer.

In Job’s letter, he spells out one thing over and over again. Greenpeace, we’re ahead of everyone else in this game while the competition is basing their score on promises. If after all the blasting Greenpeace has done to Apple, perhaps it is time they work on their own scorecard and level the field so we can have a green earth based on fact and not politics.

loading

Comments have been disabled for this post