As another person commented, maybe they should be open to that responsibility?
> The idea that one company's decisions would have such tangible and personally-harmful effects due to "negative political rhetoric, while facilitating ethnic cleansing, drug cartels, modern slavery, and vaccine disinformation" would open up every company to diffuse claims of responsibility.
Kinda scary we’re tacitly saying that IFF a company is responsible for this then it’s ok? If a person was responsible for all (any) of that, most of society would hold them in pretty low regard.
I'm not saying it's ok -- I'm saying that an individual person doesn't have enough concrete, particularized, provable harm that came from the company's actions to take that company to court.
If that became the standard, everyone could sue everyone else on the thinnest of connections.
There are laws, regulators, governments, and other entities to hold such corporations to account, but it is not the individual citizen who can show a direct and concrete connection (for those kinds of harms).
I would like to sue Donald Trump for diminishing the US's standing in the world and causing my portfolio to drop as well.
> The idea that one company's decisions would have such tangible and personally-harmful effects due to "negative political rhetoric, while facilitating ethnic cleansing, drug cartels, modern slavery, and vaccine disinformation" would open up every company to diffuse claims of responsibility.
Kinda scary we’re tacitly saying that IFF a company is responsible for this then it’s ok? If a person was responsible for all (any) of that, most of society would hold them in pretty low regard.