Apple’s turn to the Corporate Dark Side…

For the longest time, Apple have been considered one of the corporate good guys in the eyes of progressive political types.  They were the little guy who put computers in elementary and middle schools for kids to learn about.  They were the anti-Microsoft company in the 90s when Microsoft was threatening to take over the computing world.  The Mac vs. PC commercials several years ago also gave the perception that Apple was the good guy.  Steve Jobs was seen as a progressive genius.  The iPod, iPhone, and iPad were and are artistic works of beauty.  Even Al Gore is on the board of directors, and his slips of releasing iPhone secrets were seen as charming.  The Occupy Wall Street folks will protest banks, wireless companies, and other evil businesses but they do not protest Apple.  As a matter of fact, they use their iPhones and iPads as tools to get their message out.

But is the era of Apple as a corporate good guy over?  Recent evidence suggests that the death of Steve Jobs has opened the door for critics to start attacking Apple.  On a number of levels, Apple is starting to feel the heat.  Some examples:

(1) Apple’s China Syndrome:  The iPhones and iPads are completely assembled for the most part at Apple’s Foxconn facilities in China.  Recent problems at these facilities, including suicides, deadly fires, overworked employees, underage workers, and poor working conditions have come to light.  Apple has been stung by these accusations and has tried to diffuse the situation by asking a Independent Labor Agency to come in and report on Foxconn’s conditions.  Initial positive reviews have given the impression that the Agency is trying to run interference for Apple.  In addition, Apple is locked in a dispute with a Chinese electronic provider called Proview over the naming rights to iPad.  A ruling in favor of Proview last year may allow Proview not just to block selling distribution of iPads in China but also block shipping of iPads out of China to the rest of the world.  Also, there have been riots and protests at Apple stores in China for various reasons including the Foxconn situation.

(2)  Apple is now king of the (technology) world:  Thanks to the Mac, iPod, iPhone, and iPad, Apple is now unofficially the king of computer technology.  Microsoft and Intel is struggling or non-existent in the Tablet and Cell Phone World.  Other companies can’t match Apple in Computers, Tablets, or MP3 players.  The only companies worldwide that could come close to matching Apple’s dominance would be Samsung or Sony at this point.  Apple was once the little guy; now they are about as big as ExxonMobil and are worth more money than many European countries.  How will they handle being the top dog?

(3)  Media now no longer afraid to criticize Apple… and Apple is losing the PR battle.  When Steve Jobs was in charge, Apple enjoyed a good relationship with the media.  When Jobs passed away, many people who were silent critics for fear of Jobs’ vindictiveness; after his death, they now feel empowered to openly go after Apple again.  And they are not alone:  The New York Times in their investigation of Foxconn is probably using Apple as the path to a Pulitzer… and new CEO Tim Cook is not happy about it.  He has openly rebuked the NYT about their reporting, and many Apple officials are starting to no longer comment on stories to the Gray Lady.  Also, consider the world of commercials as well.  Remember the Mac vs. PC commercials Apple once produced?  Well, the tables are now turning.  Consider Samsung’s recent commercial making fun of the iPhone while touting the Galaxy S II smartphone.

(4) Tim Cook should be on the Occupiers’ Target Radar.  For serving 5 months as CEO of Apple in 2011, Tim Cook earned $378 million dollars worth of financial benefits to be the top paying CEO… $376 million of that alone was in 1 million shares of restricted stock (now worth nearly $500 million).  Consider Steve Jobs when he died only had 5.5 million shares.  His base salary in 2012 is $1.4 million.  Consider when he was CEO, Steve Jobs once famously had a salary of $1 for a year.  Now, the Apple CEO gets really paid.

(5)  Apple is starting to fall behind the wireless technology curve.  To be fair, Apple has never really been a wireless tech leader with their iPhone or iPad.  The first iPhone was based on GSM, and after initial criticism, Apple’s apps overcame the technology deficiency.  But 4G LTE has become a popular buzzword in the smartphone world and even though the tech has one chief drawback—battery life—the smartphones and tablets are all claiming 4G LTE as the salvation of the smartphone with WiFi as an offloading capability.  If the iPad3 and iPhone5 don’t have LTE technology in their devices, Apple will pay a price in terms of sales.

(6)  Apple may no longer be intimidating Network Providers.  Even as late as last year, Apple was able to strong arm Network Providers into carrying their devices (see the Sprint deal where Sprint agreed to buy 30 million iPhones over 5 years).  But Network Providers are not getting as much profit for selling the iPhone as they want because they have to heavily subsidize it.  AT&T and Verizon may balk at selling iPhones in the future because of how much it hurts the bottom line.

Of course, Apple is still not done developing new things.  iTV could make its debut later this year, the iCar is on the drawing board, and who knows what else Apple has up their sleeve.  With $100 billion of cash on hand, Apple has the opportunity to do anything and they have 4 years of products in the pipeline to keep them going in the short run.  But that could be a problem in of itself.  If Apple tries to get involved in everything, it could invite additional Apple enemies down the road.  And if Apple stops innovating, that’s another problem.

In short, the days of Apple being the corporate “good guys” are over.  Just how far Apple turns to the Corporate dark side has yet to be seen.  Tim Cook’s turn as Apple CEO will do a lot to answer that question.  But don’t be surprised if politicians and OWS forces begin to increase their venom on Apple soon.  Maybe even Al Gore himself will start blasting the company that put him on their Board of Directors.

Betraying the Catholic Church…

What do Washington Post Columnists E.J. Dionne, Michael Gereson, and Kathleen Parker have in common?  Certainly not their politics.  Dionne is a steadfast liberal, Parker is a female conservative, and Gereson… well, I think he’s conservative, though he despises Gingrich and the Tea Party.  However, each has expressed their displeasure of the Obama administration’s Health Care rules on birth control basically mandating religious schools and hospitals provide contraception coverage.  This has particularly irked the Catholic Church, who believes that the mandate violates their religious teachings.

All three Post Columnists agree that prominent Catholics who either supported or wanted to engage Obama’s Health Care push now feel betrayed—notably several high-profile Catholics.  First, Rev. John Jenkins, President of Notre Dame, who gave Obama an honorary degree that promised a “sensible” approach to the conscience clause.  Second, US Cardinal designate Timothy Dolan, who pursued an engagement policy with the administration and who in November was promised by the President conscience protections, only to be told on January 20 that no such concessions to the Catholic Schools and Hospitals would be provided.  Third, Sister Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association, was left hanging out to dry after defending Obama from Catholic Bishops opposed to the Health Care law.  Finally, the highest ranking Catholic in the Administration, Vice President Joe Biden, is now unusually silent on this issue.  Of course, since when does the President ever take the advice of Joe, who is, with each passing day, replacing Dan Quayle as the most incompetent VP in US History.  Hey Joe, this issue is a “Big F***ing Deal” as you might say!  Why so silent?  Also, consider 2016.  The likely Democratic nominee at this point is either Catholic (Biden, MD Gov. Martin O’Malley, NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo) or comes from a Catholic state (MASS Gov. Devall Patrick).  If this rule is not revoked now, the Catholic Church will impose a heavy price on the Democratic nominee to reverse the Administrations rulings on contraceptives.

The big loser in this battle is the poor, notably the inner city poor who depends on the Catholic Church for food, shelter, health care, and education.  With the Catholic Church potentially being forced to pay to cover contraceptives or be fined, there is less money for Catholic charities, schools, and hospitals to provide for those in need.  Already, Catholic Adoption Agencies have left Illinois because of disagreements over gay couples adopting children.  Forced to choose between obeying the law and obeying God, many Catholics will choose God, eliminating a lifeline for poor people, and forcing the government to intervene—at the taxpayers’ expense.

Many will use the classical separation of Church and State argument to justify removing religious symbols from public spaces.  But Separation of Church and State is a TWO-WAY street.  If the Church is told not to interfere in State matters, the opposite MUST hold true as well—meaning, the State cannot impose their will on Church matters.  Need any proof?  Look at a recent unanimous Supreme Court decision which affirmed the rights of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod against the Obama administration’s rules.  If the Catholic Church pushes the issue into the Court system, I would expect an equally decisive ruling in favor of the Church.  And columnists from across the political spectrum realize the serious of the issue and most are coming out in support of the Catholic Church.

And don’t think for a minute that the contraception is the end of it.  Abortion is the next logical step.  So, if former Michigan Congressman Bart Stupak thinks he saved America from a potentially volatile situation when he got Obama to sign an Executive Order stopping the mandate of abortion to be covered as Health Care—he should realize that an Executive Order from the President could reverse that.  Then he would join prominent Catholics allies of the President who are currently seeing the underside of Obama’s Bus.  Don’t think it could happen?  Just ask many of the President’s (potentially former) Catholic allies.

The likely outcome is that the President will reverse course in the next few weeks and provide for religious exceptions.  The unfortunate thing is that it didn’t have to come to a potential election year issue.

Is it time to end the Big Music Name Super Bowl Halftime Show?

Another halftime show has ended in controversy.  During the recent Super Bowl Halftime Show, Madonna and several Musical Acts of today performed.  Madonna performed several classics and a new song as part of the show, and many people had opinions on how good, or bad Madonna was.  But the focus after the game has been on British singer MIA who decided to remind the audience how many points the New England Patriots were leading by at halftime—either that or she was telling the audience that she was the star.  Regardless, this is now the second big musical halftime production in 9 years that has ended in controversy.  The first one, when Janet Jackson showed a little too much of her body to MTV’s initial approval, ended up forcing MTV to all-reality TV and sending a lot of shock jocks (including Howard Stern) to either early retirement or satellite radio.  In this instance, both the NFL and NBC immediately condemned the middle finger, but the aftershocks are still yet to be felt.  Perhaps the biggest effect of this incident may be the end of the Big Music Name Halftime Show.

Ever since Ms. Jackson got nasty in Houston, the NFL and network TV has tried to tow the line between playing it safe and entertaining the audience with legendary names in music.  Some have worked well (Bruce Springsteen and Paul McCartney are examples) and some have not panned out well (like Tom Petty and The Black-Eyed Peas).  Madonna has had more positive feedback than negative in this version, and personally, I think she would have been nice without the additional singers.  When the best guest singer was last seen at last year’s Grammy’s dressed up as a big parrot with rejects from Jim Henson singing a song called, “F**k you”, you need to dump the back-up crew.

If you want to make a statement, the Grammy’s or the MTV Music Awards is the place to do it, not in front of over a billion people watching a sporting event.  This is exactly what the NFL did not need, and the knee-jerk reaction will probably be the reason next year’s Super Bowl Halftime show will feature Up With People (and nobody wants to see THAT).

Of course, some people are defending MIA’s right to “Express Herself”, and many of these people are the same ones who will crucify any larger than life leader (they have been probably piling on the deceased Joe Paterno in recent weeks, but that’s for another post). My response? The NFL watched the rehearsal and did not see MIA do that in practice. MIA decided to wait until the real show to pull her attention-getting stunt. That was premeditated.

Here’s an idea:  it’s time to end the Practice of Using Big Name Music Acts as the Super Bowl Halftime Entertainment.  If you want to have a music act, why not a marching band, like they do it at many halftime football games?  Why not invite the reigning DCI World Champions to be the Halftime Entertainment?  Many who are musically inclined (especially with Bands) will stick around, while those who aren’t will take a break to watch something else.  Do we really need to keep audiences in their chairs for four hours straight?

You know the day is coming when some musical act will lie about their intentions and use their halftime show as a protest of their own.  That will probably kill the Halftime Show altogether.  Also, not everyone will be completely satisfied with the Big Name Choices for Halftime and will have already made up their minds before the show, no matter how good or bad it was.  You could see it in last night’s comments on Facebook and Yahoo!.

In the end, the NFL can tell me to take my opinions and go away.  But, I’m just offering a little advice.  It’s time the NFL did away with the Big Production Shows and just focus on the Game.