Thoughts on the morality of the profit motive

The way in which Marks and Spencer recently 'withdrew' its advertising from the UK's Daily Mail newspaper website, I think, may be indicative of the way business deals with 'controversial' subjects or events.  This in turn may have parallels in what might happen should Taiwanese business become entirely dependent on the Chinese market and Beijing-directed investment.

After the online publishing of a barely concealed homophobic attack against the recently late Boyzone singer Stephen Gately by Jan Moir, Marks and Spencer made the following courageous move:

"We have asked the Daily Mail to move our advert away from the article," said a spokesman for Marks & Spencer.

Asked why, he said: "That is a matter for the Daily Mail." 

Note that they asked the Daily mail to move the advert away from the article but stopped short of withdrawing their advertising altogether.  Moving a digital image is a far easier option than stopping advertising with a readership that might provide handsome profits.  It appears to suggest Marks and Spencer cares about not being associated with homophobia whilst actually not impacting the Daily Mail's ad revenues even slightly.  Win-win for the Daily Mail and Marks and Spencers and arguably freedom of speech.  But this is hate speech, no matter how veiled and cleverly articulated. Furthermore, as Stephen Fry pointed out, it may contravene the law.  Homophobia is 'controversial' enough for Marks and Spencer to feel it necessary to make a symbolic protest but the numbers of homophobic Britons willing to buy Marks and Spencers products after reading the Daily Mail constitute a more powerful motive for not putting profit before principle.

A similar thing has already happened in Taiwan.  Following the screening of a documentary in Kaohsiung that China objected to, Beijing effectively 'pulled' visiting Chinese tourist groups from going to the south of Taiwan, a fact they barefacedly admitted.  As Taiwanese tourism businesses become dependent upon the flow of Chinese tourists, Beijing gains more leverage to make a whole range of demands.  The above example was of a foreign country dictating to Taiwan what films could be shown at Film Festival.  How soon then before Taiwanese businesses start making further concessions so as to ensure the continued supply of sweet poison from China?

Once China rather than Taiwan becomes the largest single market for Taiwanese businesses, I suspect profit will be placed before such esoteric principles such as democracy and freedom.  After all, goes the argument, aren't those who raise 'sensitive' subjects not just short-sighted and selfish trouble makers hurting the ability of Taiwanese business to make a profit?   Shouldn't everyone be free to do business as they wish? The customer is right and to be respected regardless of the blood splattered across their dollar notes.  Money speaks. ... ad nauseum
 
But if profit has no moral component,surely it becomes amoral, or open to the highest bidder, whatever the bidding.  I think that the result is that I pay A to kill B because it is far easier and less costly than going through the correct bureaucratic channels.  In a country where there is little supporting democratic practice other than a general sense that it is preferable to Martial Law, introducing a player whose goal is political unification and who has enormous financial resources at the outset of negotiations to the Taiwanese market seems to me to be little more than economic, and democratic, suicide.   History is littered with similar examples of capitulation through the peace and economy model of annexation. 

My own stumbling uncertain foray into this worrisome link between profit motive and business is much better executed in the following must read posts:

----->  Taiwan, China and Freedom
----->  The closer we move to Beijing, the farther we move  from democracy

Other links:

• Democracy activist in China gets 10 years
• Honorary KMT Chairman and Traitor-of-Taiwanese Lien Chan to be Taiwan's APEC representative 09
• United Daily News headline: Taiwan will engage in political dialogue with China if three conditions are met. (anyone got a link?)
• There's a rush to sign the ECFA or else Taiwan will sink into the Pacific or explode or something like that.  The December talks will be low key.  Expect fireworks for the 5th round when they try to sign an ECFA that no-one really knows the content, or realizes the possible impact, of.
• David on Formosa on Woodstock
• Peace Festival is Nov 6-8 near Hualien.  Be interesting to see if the Taichung crowd will travel en masse (Taichung expats consistently send their 'strongest squad' for away fixtures that involve music, drinking and amazing scenery.  Indeed, Spring Scream is a Taichung born and run event)
  
• Roger Lin to be tried for Treason? Demo puts out the call for verification. 
• 7-week march around Taiwan -- Sovereignty Derives from the People -- 人民作主苦行 Citizens are the Boss Walk 

On 10/18 Mr. Lin, I-Hsiung will participate in a short walk from Long-San Temple (龍山寺) to 2.28 Memorial Park and help distributing flyers along the way to publicize the planned event. Mr. Lin will then participate the 7-week (11/8 - 12/26) walking event. This planned walk will start in Taipei on 11/8, follows the west coast going south to the southern end of Taiwan and then turns northward along the east coast to return to Taipei on 12/27.

政 黨輪替以來，台灣政治陷入行政和立法部門由單一政黨掌控，監督制衡機制嚴重失靈的困境。馬政府自恃一黨獨大，強行推動「一中」政策，向中華人民共和國大幅 傾斜，造成台灣社會的惶惑不安。有鑑於此，核四公投促進會經過數個月的討論，慎重發起「人民作主運動」，要求馬總統確實遵守「台灣前途應由兩千三百萬人民 決定」的競選承諾，即刻：1. 依公民投票法第十七條所賦予的職權，就「台灣公民是否同意本屆政府在『一個中國』的前提下，和對岸簽訂經濟合作或其他協議。」一案舉行公投，並以投票結果做為兩岸會談與協商的原則。2. 要求行政院迅即向立法院提出公投法修正案，補正現行「公投法」之不合理條文、落實主權在民精神。我們將於近日內展開密集行動：10月15日（四）：記者會時間：上午 10::00am集合地點：228紀念碑前10月18日（日）：台北市苦行及發傳單。時間：上午 8:30am集合地點：台北市龍山寺對面廣場後續：10月25日（日）：台中座談會11月01日（日）：高雄座談會11月8日至12月26日：「人民作主運動」全國苦行竭誠歡迎疼惜台灣的你/妳一起來參與。感謝核四公投促進會 敬上