Amazon trying to cover their ass?

Updated Wednesday, September 4, 2024 5:10 p.m. EST - Amazon reached out to deny the reports of a crack down on singing along with the radio in trucks and provided this PR video clip as evidence. A PR spokesperson told Jalopnik: “This post is completely inaccurate. Amazon has never issued guidance or communications to Delivery Service Partners that prohibits singing in the vehicle.”

https://youtu.be/3ddtY_iOrk8

  • tee900@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    So if they say they didnt, then why does the post title say they did?

    The source of this claim was from an employee right? Is it accurate?

    • TheFriar@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      “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.

      • tee900@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Sounds like a healthy opportunity to say we dont know, or maybe not comment/post at all.

        Pulling “gotchya” moments out of thin air to spite big money just makes us stupid.

        “I dont have time to investigate amazon myself so im just going to pull out my scorecard and mark one for the proletariats.”

        Who does that serve? What does that do? Besides make us desensitized to more substantiated wrongdoings?

        • ChapulinColorado@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          At some point being a shit company to employees (and contractors) will affect consumers’ perceptions of you. I would say people not siding with Amazon by default is their own doing even if normally you would give the benefit of the doubt.

          It would also not surprise me if they come back with some B.S. later like “it turns out it was the subcontractor monitoring workers, but totally not Amazon. Ignore the Amazon logo on the side of the truck”.

        • TheFriar@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          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.

          • tee900@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            You actively discredit yourself and create an alternate reality. You confuse people about the real issues because we dont know if outrage is fabricated/perpetuated.

            If people or corporations create false narratives we should seek the truth. You are just trying to make yourself feel better.