Forbes Magazine - don't hire trump spokespeople

Blacklisting workers is uncool and illegal in most states. Forbes should scrutinize such spokespeople carefully given their track record. But to publish that you'll do that and encourage companies to avoid those workers looks like they are conspiring to keep those people unemployed. Unethical. I suppose the spox can make a living by suing Forbes.

 

Can you sue someone for having an opinion? Good luck proving you've been blackballed without a paper trail. Look at AJ Hinch.

 

I'm sure if they interview well they can get a job in the mail room somewhere.

 

It's still unethical.

 

Not denying that.

 

the primary ethical breach would be an unprecedented level of lying and gaslighting from government officials leading to a literally deadly breakdown of civil society and near congressional tragedy on January 6.

any opinion statements from private entities like Forbes after that pale in ethical comparison, but we can intellectually quibble for fun I guess.

EDIT: for instance, if I was Forbes content editor, I would have just stated why I would not be hiring these people. I wouldn’t threaten other outlets. What he did was, at least, ham-fisted and clumsy.

 

...I don't think scrutiny is akin to blacklisting.
...and truth is all-encompassing...even if it isn't widely embraced.

...Doesn't sound like anybody's not getting hired. But nobody's going to hire a liar (for a public relations position in their company, for example) of the type that's defended the Donald the past few years publicly (businesses, despite their outsized influence, are still private endeavors) over material untruths that affect the state...

...it is, of course hypocritical, given that "spin" and "stretching" the truth has for a very long time been common practice for both public governance and private business.

It's dangerous to attempt in this manner, admittedly...but I believe, as I always do, that we have to draw the line in everything we do as a society, at the truth...
...and stop finding reasons and excuses to step over it whenever it suits us...

 

There's another thread for the Capitol Riot. This one is about Forbes' efforts at blacklisting spokespeople. I get the sentiment and I approve of some of the recent de-platforming efforts companies have made. But I guess I care more about workers' rights than I do about crushing all of my enemies. Forbes crosses a line. Just like I believe we should remain law-abiding when we protest in the streets, we should retain our morals when we move in the market.

 

not to argue, but everything I posted belongs in the thread. Forbes took an unusually strong step — you’re calling it unethical, which is defensible — and did so for a reason, and that reason belongs in the discussion. The perps are not enemies in any normal political sense. They are, we can argue, complicit in treasonous conspiracy or at least full and willful betrayal of public trust (ongoing, notably, from at least two of them).

I think Forbes crossed a line in recommending industry-wide blacklisting, but I would defend an editorial that simple stated why they would never hire the complicit.

 

Ethically speaking why would you hire unethical people to work for your company?

 

Don’t want to speak for OP, but one might say: the individuals are not charged with, let alone convicted of any crimes, and have the right to pursue a livelihood (?) I hope no part of the argument includes: they were just following orders. (Shudder.)

 

Was it ethical for them to lie to American people for the Donald?

 

Lol, juan on labor law, maybe you should represent them?

In week of absolute horror, Guy who has opinions finds mild repercussion and starts drawing up papers for his imaginary lawsuit. Concerted refusal to deal! 10 years to life! Objection!

 

...you SURE you want these people handling YOUR mail?

...if they'd had their way, they would have rifled through a lot of election votes and thrown a bunch of them out...

 

Can definitely see Kayleigh McNinny turning into a Newman type force of evil.

 

I'd never hire any of those people. And if I saw them show up as the PR person for some company, I'd probably do like Forbes and distrust everything they had to say because they are apparently willing to tell any lie that would benefit their employers. But I also wouldn't publish an editorial to millions of people warning/threatening/promising them that any employer would suffer negative consequences for hiring them, and encouraging organizations like mine to align their practices with mine. That's for them to figure out without coordinating in an anti-competitive way with other organizations.

What if Forbes published an article saying they'd never charge less than $9.99 for an issue of their magazine and provided a good rationale for why magazines should keep $9.99 as a price floor. It doesn't matter how good the rationale is, it's price collusion, anti-competitive and plainly illegal. "Advising" is just a nicer word than "conspiring".

 

No one hired the Nazis either, consequences for your actions.

DD

 

Collusion tends to be secret and in deception.