The idea of mixing work and politics is always a hot topic, and understandably so. Most companies have customers – and employees – on both ends of the political spectrum, and being neutral is often the only way to make all parties feel respected and comfortable. They say never to discuss religion and politics at a dinner party; Well, the same rule can be applied in the marketplace or workplace.
The problem is, “politics” is a broad term, and at some point everyone—even corporate leaders—must draw a line. Neutrality is not always an option.
Consider, for example, a hypothetical infrastructure bill that passes through Congress. This is politics we don’t discuss at work for many reasons. It can be a sensitive topic; There could be extreme positions on both sides of the aisle as to whether the bill should be passed, modified, or suspended altogether. Is it necessary for a business to take a public stance on this? Except for a few businesses, probably not. Companies can (and often do) remain independent.
But what about when it’s a human rights issue? About war? Genocide? These topics, globally, are often considered political, but they can affect a larger percentage of consumers than any other issue we call politics. So the decision to be independent is very complicated. Some companies choose to take a political stand; Others insist that they “stay on their feet” and focus solely on their product or service.
But there, of course, is the dirt: the products and services. What if a company’s product or service is directly related to the issue? Is a neutral position really possible on that point? Or is neutral too complicated?
Especially technology companies should consider this question. We can’t pretend that the products we create aren’t used universally for all kinds of uses – some positive and some negative. But can we say we are neutral if our weapons are being used by governments to commit war crimes?
How are your devices used?
We must do more. Some of the tech industries have a corrosive power over culture, relationships, laws, and policies. With such power, neutrality is impossible. But what exactly does this mean? It means that tech companies need to take more ownership of how their devices are used.
That can start with something as simple as terminating a business. If a company is knowingly selling products or services to a party that causes harm—and worse, using those products or services to do so—that company has chosen a side. They are not independent. Realizing this, technology companies have to make tough decisions to get out of such business relationships.
My own company recently did this. We believe that we have a responsibility to stand up to Russia with the people of Ukraine and we have taken steps accordingly. We no longer do business with companies supporting Russia and offer our services for free to those who actively support or are in Ukraine. To do otherwise would be tantamount to supporting the Russian invasion; There is simply no independent option.
Why do business leaders think that ethics ceases to exist if profits are involved? This thinking defeats the real reason behind so-called neutrals: If it makes a profit, most leaders don’t care about anything else. It also shows some short-sightedness because, let’s face it, losing profits in the short term for such a reason usually helps your business in the long run. Customers care about these things, and they don’t take kindly to businesses that support egregious acts of violence.
But the importance goes further than that. Today, many technology companies play an important role in international relations, which has a significant impact on politics, policies and actual human rights issues. And yet these companies – social media companies, content platforms and the like – all still seem to want to remain as independent as possible. We can’t have it both ways. Neutrality inevitably favors one or the other. As writer, Nobel laureate and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel succinctly put it, “neutrality never benefits the oppressor, but the victim.”
We are in the age of all things digital, with the change of every facet of the world society at the hands of technical innovations. It’s powerful—exciting and even—and it can truly make this world a better place. That’s why many of us got into tech in the first place, right? Hope for that. That feeling. But if the technological advances we make add fuel to hatred, tyranny, or war, it will do little or no harm. We must take responsibility for the technology we are creating; Companies need to do more. We must use the wonderful tools at our disposal to help the oppressed and abandon this fruitless desire to be eternally “neutral.” Neutrality is cowardice.
