# data[].attributes.body
Amelie Daire, Mary Dougherty, Kelly Lambertson, Joseph Ruiz

# data[].attributes.body
- Be sure you are logged in to Padlet so your post won't be anonymous.
- Click on the + sign in your Case's column.
- Put your Name where it says "Title"
- Click the upload arrow on the left to post the pdf of your visual aid.
Where it says "Write something..."
Copy and paste:
- your 3 discussion questions
- the link to your Panopto video in the Chapter [assignments] folder

# data[].attributes.body
Sophia Asaro, Kayla Bayardelle, Giulianna Nehme, Khaya Tigner-Sokol

# data[].attributes.headline
Team 4: Amélie Daire, Mary Dougherty, Kelly Lambertson, and Joseph Ruiz

# data[].attributes.subject
Team 4: Amélie Daire, Mary Dougherty, Kelly Lambertson, and Joseph Ruiz

# data[].attributes.body
https://marist.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=6c2da7db-c687-42f1-92e9-afa70117c768

Discussion Questions:

1. After grasping an understanding of how the Pork Industry went about informing the public about their viewpoint of utilizing sow gestation crates, do you think they did so in an efficient and effective manner? Is the Pork Industry socially responsible? Why?

2. In the event that you are a strong supporter of animal welfare, would you view the use of sow gestation crates as animal cruelty, even after seeing the research and explanation the Pork Industry provided?

3. If you worked in the Pork Industry, would you handle the situation, regarding all the criticism, any differently?

# data[].attributes.headline
Sophia Asaro, Kayla Bayardelle, Giulianna Nehme, Khaya Tigner-Sokol

# data[].attributes.subject
Sophia Asaro, Kayla Bayardelle, Giulianna Nehme, Khaya Tigner-Sokol

# data[].attributes.body
https://marist.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=e7e61f25-8815-4ecc-bfa3-afa6012e2b45

Discussion Questions:
1. Do you agree with how apple handled this situation after the ny times released the article?

2. Does this situation regarding the living conditions Apple employees are working under change the way you feel about Apple in general?

3. Would you have emailed the Apple employees the way the CEO did once the New York Times article came out or would you have called a meeting to discuss the situation in order for people to state their personal opinions?

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think the pork industry did not disclose all of the facts when they released information on how they house their pig livestock. I think much of the meat industry is not socially responsible because in order to keep up with the meat demand in America has led them to unethical practices like this one.
2. I would view this as animal cruelty, especially since the Humane Society deemed it as unhealthy and I trust their research.
3. I think the Pork Industry responded pretty well to this situation, especially as the National Pork Board poured its resources, amounting to $12.7
million to support operational freedom strategies.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I agree with how Apple handled the situation after the NY Times article came out. They took all the right actions and did it quickly and effectively.

2. I would say that the situation had me look at Apple differently at first. Once I heard how they handled it afterwards, I had more respect for the company. They did not ignore the problem and they took full responsibility.

3. I would have emailed the Apple employees, but also reached out differently to employees who were affected or wanted to discuss the matter further.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I believe that the Pork Industry responded to the public in a good way, but didn’t release all the information they could have. They took responsibility for their actions and made the right changes maybe a little too late. For example, they spend 12$ million dollars to support operational freedom strategies. I think the Pork Industry should have been socially responsible for how they were treating animals and they finally did take responsibility.

2. If I were a strong supporter of animal welfare, I would still view this as animal cruelty even after the explanation.

3.  If I worked in the Pork Industry I would have done less defending of the criticism and owned up to the wrongdoings in the first place. Although now the industry is making a difference, I think it could have been earlier. Besides that, I believe everything they did was great.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I actually do agree with how apple handled his situation after the NY times released the article. They followed the right protocol by not ignoring the situation or dismissing the article. They monitored news and social media while addressing the problem by implementing new Apple’s Supplier Code of Conduct.

2. In a weird way, it actually better my view of Apple. Yes, they were caught contracting a manufacturer that allows poor working conditions for employees, but Apple made an effort and was successful in fixing it. They didn’t just ignore the media and bad press. They said a way “we hear you, and we are going to do better” and started implementing working standards for their manufacturer's employee working conditions. A lot of huge companies like that know they are too big to break, so would just wait till the bad press blew over. But Apple decided to take the socially responsible route and did something about it.

3. Personally, I would have called a meeting and had as many employees come as possible. I would also video-record the meeting. I think this would be a much more personal response and not seen as just a ‘reactive’ response like an email. It would also be an opportunity for employees to voice their opinion rather than just read an email and not receive any feedback. After the meeting, I would have summarized it and sent it to the employees that were unable to attend the meeting, with an attached video link to the live meeting.

# data[].attributes.body
1.) I think the Pork Industry went about informing the public in an effective manner. They provided the public with research and valuable information to support their reasoning. They had a multitude of videos explaining their viewpoints and interacted with the public through face-to-face presentations.
2.) If the animals were being harmed in any way, I would still see this as animal cruelty.
3.) I think the industry needed to do more corrective action. Although they did a lot of research and investigation and giving people information, I would have liked to see more strategies of them taking actions and evaluation in their efforts. Other than that I think it was really good that they admitted to their wrongdoings.

# data[].attributes.body
1. After the article was released, I agree fully with how Apple handled the situation. They were called out, and of course this issue should have been handled prior to being exposed so publicly but unfortunately these days responses often come only after attention from the media and the public. Apple handed it well given these circumstances.

2. Initially yes, as it's a bit shocking to hear. Ultimately, I feel as if I don't look at Apple any differently as they truly handled the situation well, which helps to build consumer trust after a bad PR moment.

# data[].attributes.body
3. Although it was untrue information, I do believe they went about it in an efficient and effective manner. They convinced the public for a while that sow gestation crates not only enhanced the production of pork for the growing demand, but was also humane. But it in fact was not, as founded by HSUS. I believe the industry is socially responsible now, but it was not back in 2007-2010.

2. If I were a strong supporter of animal welfare I would most certainly view the use of sow gestation crates as animal cruelty, even after seeing the research and explanation the Pork Industry provided. I feel that people in that position would see it cruel for any animal to be locked up in tight conditions, especially pregnant animals. So even with the explanation the Pork Industry provided, I would ask for pictures of their living space. Then I would decide.

3. If I was In the pork industry I would immediately switch the living conditions of the pigs the moment people found out the truth about sow gestation crates. Smithfield Foods even after pledging to phase out  sow gestation crates were found still using them 3 years later. Because of this they  received much more negative PR that they could have avoided.

# data[].attributes.body
I think Apple handled the problem very well as they made immediate changes and informed the public. Something they could have done differently was have a meeting or send out mandatory information for all employees to be informed upon. Other than that, the company did a good job of masking the problem and I applaud them on their response.

# data[].attributes.body
I think no matter the circumstances, the use of gestation crates would be a problem in the eyes of animal activists. While they did address the issue, the problem shouldn't have happened in the first place. This is a trick case as it is a bigger problem legally that I think was handled properly but it is still a huge problem in the PETA world.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I agree with how Apple handled the situation after the article came out. They did everything they could and were effective in how they addressed certain issues.
2. The situation regarding living conditions Apple employees are working under does change the way I look at their company. They were giving their workers poor conditions, even though they went about to say that they understood people and implemented new practices, the working conditions still have me questioning their company more than before.
3. I personally would have called a meeting to discuss the situation in order for people to state their opinions. I believe a meeting would be a more civil approach and would allow many the chance to speak what they were feeling and give their honest truth on the situation. This meeting would also allow for further feedback on the situation and allow for it to be a more personal, more meaningful approach.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think the pork industry was effective in disclosing all information about the industry to the public and letting them know in a timely manner. They provided the public with plenty of opportunities to give their opinions and also offered the ability to interact with the public.
2. I would view the use of sow gestation rates as animal cruelty even after seeing the research the Pork Industry provided. If animals are being harmed or abused in any way, it is defined as animal cruelty.
3. If I worked in the Pork Industry, I would handle the situation by telling the truth and being transparent about the conflicts that take place and what went wrong. Being upfront and honest is the only solution in this case.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Promptness is a key part of effective PR and I think Apple's quick yet thought-out response to the situation was the right move. The satisfaction of the company's employees should be Apple's first priority and this situation should have never happened. Nonetheless, Apple handed it well and took full accountability for its actions.
2. Apple products are hundreds, sometimes thousands of dollars, and with a purchase like that, I hope that the company is making ethical decisions since I am choosing a more expensive product than their competitor, Samsung. I think the way Apple handled the situation gives me faith in their PR team, something I didn't really doubt before. I lose trust in Apple's philosophy and priorities as a company but am happy with the changes they made, like doing an audit on themselves.
3. I think in-person is always better than online, so I probably would have called a meeting. Even if the meeting was on Zoom, a human discussion is better than a one-sided email with little opportunity to foster discussion on the situation.

# data[].attributes.body
1) I think it was in the pork industry's favor to speak and address the matter in order to make themselves look less guilty and hold more accountability on their part; even though their response seemed to lack a lot of information. I would consider The Pork Industry socially responsible for its contribution to the big problem of the state of our current supply and demand, as well as socially responsible for the animals.

2) Even after the Pork Industry presented its solution, I still believe it falls under animal cruelty from personal beliefs, as well as the research that was behind it.

3) If I worked in the Pork Industry, I would find a way to work hand in hand with the other industries that are protesting against me. Fighting them is only going to create a bigger divide and no solution or happy medium for either team. Showing your unity would only benefit and make the reputation of the Pork Industry stronger.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I agree with how Apple handled the situation. They responded quickly and with all the right means. Apple is such a huge coporation so it is important for them to do so.

2. Yes it does change my view on Apple. A company that makes as much money and has as much power as Apple does should be able to make a chnage for the way their employees are treated.

3. I think I would have called a meeting because human rights are more important to speak about than just over email.

# data[].attributes.body
1. I think that the pork industry did respond in a good way. While some people don't agree with the practices of the pork industry, they did respond accordingly. They spent almost 40 million dollars to try and make things better.

2. I think I would still view this case as animal cruelty even in the event that they aplogized and tried to change their ways.

3. If I worked in the pork industry I would try to make a more clear plan of action. It seems that the pork industry made a plan of action based more on impending legal problems and not the wellfare of the animals.