During the course of our Social Media class, terms like Corporate Responsibility and Transparency were discussed quite often. For this reason, coming across this article, was extremely well-timed. I found this article on the Corporate Responsibility Megazine site. Almost immeditely, the title of Darkness Visible grabbed my attention. Perhaps, because when I think of something “good’ I tend to think of light, not darkness, and since this article’s author was trying to convey good, the title appeared to be somewhat conflicting with the purpose. Justifiably intriged, I had to read on.
The article highlighted the top 100 least transparent companies from a total of1000 publicly traded organizations. This completely involuntary audit did not meassure important topics such as energy conservation programs or health spending accounts offerings. The only standard measure used was disclosure. Whether these companies conducted good practices or not was not the question. The only thing these companies had to do (but clearly did not) in order to avoid being on the “Black List” was to disclose their practices, according to the article.
Although noble in its intent, the
article gave very little details about the actual questions included in the audit
process and even less of the companies in question, none of which sounded even remotely familiar to me. This creates a disconnect between the audience and the
content. I feel that in order to compel individuals to act or get involved
there must be some sort of link or connection
that lacks here. Although the author is trying to inform readers of a very
important issue, he does not include adequate information for the audience (me)
to get the sense of urgency that he might have been trying to convey.
No comments:
Post a Comment