![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpCqsUD0PMwa6XC8K5tWZVbFiY7m_GgAwgVXqKGzZxy0nKy0rxFVjz2oDuQcjHoTSUdWgMwFxMWNsXbj7KscSCIkfdnIv5SGRzNlK7nI3r15bfxhvXCBoratH8WeylaKwa-cs/s400/apple.gif)
The Apple board, of which Al Gore is a member, said no. And they voted unanimously. You do the math.
No? This one is a bit of a mystery. To preserve good consumer and investor relations, a little more information than "No" and the one-liner that Apple "already has adequate environmental standards" is required. Combing their site for additional text on the matter didn't turn up anything - you can try. Unlike Greenpeace, this treehugger doesn't feel the need to woodshed them, but this is just weird; are the chemicals not toxic? Is the resolution bullshit? When you are in the spotlight, you need to say something.
No comments:
Post a Comment