Amazon setting a standard with WikiLeaks

Where do we draw the line with ethics? We have billions of people in poverty, starving around the world. We have climate issues to learn about and act on.

The reason I ask this question is because of the recent acts of Amazon against Wiki Leaks. For those of you that don’t know Wiki Leaks is a political nightmare; they are an organisation and website that publicises all sorts of sensitive information. They recently leaked 400,000 secret documents from the US government. You can read more about that here. So, Amazon have decided to remove Wiki Leaks from their servers in an attempt to silence them and stop their ever-growing momentum. Now, this is what I don’t understand…

In a world where so much more can be done by companies to end poverty and address resource constraints, why are we banning a political website that has a lot of support from the public? If Amazon, as a company, want to take an ethical stand point, why on something so fickle? Have they drawn the ‘ethical line’, for all to see, with Wiki Leaks? Or, are they starting to take action as a company.

If it’s the latter, then I would love to see coca cola or any ‘obesity-encouraging’ company banned too. But why stop there, let’s ban any banks that finance companies with unethical initiatives. You see where I am going with this?

If Amazon wants to take a stand and leave a legacy – a positive mark on the world – then why not start by doing something big…something inspirational?

What are your thoughts? I want to know what you think, please comment below.

If you like what you see, please subscribe.

2 Comments to “Amazon setting a standard with WikiLeaks”

I think there is a wider issue of hypocrisy here:

December 5, 2010 Reply

If that i true, well there is definitely more going on. But the point of the blog post is to ask whether companies will start to take a stand on other moral issues; like fair wages for staff employed in developing countries, the boycott of unhealthy/unethical companies and so on.

Thanks for the comment, though.

December 5, 2010 Reply

Leave a reply