82,882
edits
Firm - Risk Article: Difference between revisions
→The horribly public interior monologue of the corporate person
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
Unlike a real person, a [[corporation]]’s interior monologue is not private. Nor is it tactful or discreet. It is tactless and verbose comprising self-interested individuals shouting at the same time, [[adding]] each other to conversations they don’t care to be a part of. {{author|Joel Bakan}} says a [[corporation]] is like a [[psychopath]]. It might be ''run'' by them – that’s entirely plausible – but in its own personality it is more like a paranoid schizophrenic. In the analog world this was copeable; in this age of infinite information it has proven to be a far greater bane than anyone realised. ''Everything'' is [[discovery|discoverable]]; and like all communications that can be pulled out of context, inevitably it looks worse in hindsight than it did when it was written down. | Unlike a real person, a [[corporation]]’s interior monologue is not private. Nor is it tactful or discreet. It is tactless and verbose comprising self-interested individuals shouting at the same time, [[adding]] each other to conversations they don’t care to be a part of. {{author|Joel Bakan}} says a [[corporation]] is like a [[psychopath]]. It might be ''run'' by them – that’s entirely plausible – but in its own personality it is more like a paranoid schizophrenic. In the analog world this was copeable; in this age of infinite information it has proven to be a far greater bane than anyone realised. ''Everything'' is [[discovery|discoverable]]; and like all communications that can be pulled out of context, inevitably it looks worse in hindsight than it did when it was written down. | ||
There is a case that the law of [[privilege]] needs to be entirely re-thought for the machine age to recognise that a [[corporation]]'s interior monologue should be allowed to be as private as an {{ | There is a case that the law of [[privilege]] needs to be entirely re-thought for the machine age to recognise that a [[corporation]]'s interior monologue should be allowed to be as private as an {{risk|individual}}’s: judicial proclivities have been heading in the other direction<ref>{{casenote1|Three Rivers No. 5}}, and {{casenote|Serious Fraud Office|Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation}} though more recent decisions are stepping back from this somewhat.</ref>. This disincentivises the free expression of ideas and concerns within an organisation, which cannot be a good thing. | ||
===Other themes=== | ===Other themes=== | ||