Jump to content

Nikon PR nightmares


Andrew Reid
 Share

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, iamoui said:

I don't think companies as a whole are purposely discriminating against women. If they were, women would not be in high positions, which they are.

Check this ratio (male/female in high positions). Its the only thing you have to do to answer some your own questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Due to my recent purchases I've been spending a fair bit of time on Fujifilm X-based forums and I've been pleasantly surprised by a larger percentage of women contributors than I'm used to. It's by no means 50/50, but is noticeably higher. The same goes for the numbers of women photographers featured on the various Fuji-watching blogs and sites. As to why this should be - I have absolutely no idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

This sort of talk is simply not true. Not even the part about profit since its proven that a diverse company are more efficient and makes more profit than one that's not.
They hire men because they are men.



 

Proven by who? Where is the source? 

And.. I'm sure bean counters in big corporations know better where profit comes from than some random Gender Studies professors. 

I don't believe Apple hire males because they are male! Its Apple you're talking about.. a completely liberal company. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/17/2017 at 11:08 AM, Arikhan said:

 

My mom works for more than 20 years in the health industry. My grandma - till retired - worked as physician in Bavaria. Every 2-3 years armchair editors wrote about "discrimination" and "sexism" against women in the health indistry. The truth? There was none...Brainwashing at its best...

 

Not even worth arguing about.  There is a ton of documentation of sexism, racism, homophobia, etc in the healthcare industry.  I mean the healthcare industry has a long sordid history of despicable discrimination.  And for someone who worked in the healthcare industry in GERMANY of all places to make such a claim is truely laughable.  Dr. Mengele only died in 1979.

Only in 1987 did homosexuality get completely removed from the psychiatric diagnostic manual... but yet somehow your GRANDMOTHER was living in some completely discrimination free utopia?

Also in an environment with lawsuits and bad publicity a lot of discrimination goes underground.  Often times the person that is subjected to the discrimination doesn't even know about it.  It is not like people are still going around the southern United States burning crosses on people's lawns.  My advice is look up "Lilly Ledbetter" if you want to see what the results of hidden discrimination are.

On 9/17/2017 at 12:00 PM, mercer said:

Just to clarify, I agree the industry should be more open and diverse. All industries should be. But if you look at the photo posted upthread of the photographers chosen... they were all Asian... so where is the outrage that there were no photographers of African descent or Middle Eastern descent, or Caucasian or Latino?

 

Nikon is a Japanese company.  Japan is one of the least diverse countries on the planet.  It has maybe only 1.6% foreigners living there.  It is kind of ethnocentric to think every country on the planet is as racially diverse as your country.  But I am pretty sure they have women.

On 9/17/2017 at 11:36 AM, mercer said:

I just think it's kinda funny that a bunch of guys on a male dominated, video forum pretend to understand and preach the struggles of sexism.

Really?  Hmmm...  The place I see the most sexism is in the locker room at the old boys club.  I of course don't want to become a target of the power structure so I just keep my mouth shut but I can tell you with no doubt what so ever if women ever heard the things those guys say there would be multiple successful lawsuits against major institutions where I live.

Those guys casually talk about blatant violations of antidiscrimination laws.  It is weird.  They don't even consider that some of those women are my friends.  And of course the women are oblivious to it because this stuff is never said in their presence and all anyone is told is "there is no discrimination, just do your job and you too will enjoy the American dream".

On 9/17/2017 at 12:00 PM, mercer said:

Discrimination is a strong charge that shouldn't be thrown around lightly without 100% proof.

What country do you live in?  Discrimination is often a civil matter and you can win a discrimination case with a preponderance of evidence.  You don't need to prove anything beyond a shadow of a doubt.  And this isn't a lawsuit.  It is just pointing out what poor form Nikon showed.  Do you think someone at Nikon is crying?  Since when are multibillion dollar multinationals such snowflakes?

On 9/17/2017 at 12:00 PM, mercer said:

But diversity should be encouraged and celebrated as long as it's not just for the sake of diversity.

Why not?  Plenty of scientific papers prove that diversity in and of itself is a good thing.  You wouldn't read a diverstiy of books?  You wouldn't eat a diversity of foods?  You wouldn't travel to a diversity of places?  Why do all these gymnastics to fight common sense?  We spend our whole lives seeking diversity but when it comes to people all of a sudden OH NO we must avoid it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎9‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 8:51 AM, maxotics said:

I'm not sure Andrew's server could take the load of a thread dedicated to "white wronged husbands", if that's the right translation? :)  If he can, sign me up ;) When I had children I expected them to rebel.  I never imagined that I'd deal with weeks worth of wrath because I forgot to call one of my daughter's 15-year old friends "he" (because the girl identified that way).  Then all the lectures I received from my daughter's cabal about the rights of their gender identity--fluid, transgender, bigender, pangender, etc.  I eventually went  ""vit kränkt man" on them.  That earned me another few months of stink-eye.  

I had a friend who went to visit Japan.  I said, how was it, did they talk to you.  "Only when I did something wrong" he said dryly.  The country is almost as nutty as North Korea--and I don't say that lightly ;)   Decades ago the world has moved past (though hardly a dead issue of course) female rights to gender rights.  And yet Nikon Asia marketing, the very people who should be aware of what's socially acceptable, pick an all-male group to represent a camera?  Is the phrase "what planet are they on?"  an exaggeration?

 

 

It could be that the people swarming the stores for the latest high tech gadget are, for the most part, not female (you might comment on why that is from a social point of view, but it is a fact), and that the Nikon execs are, for the most part, a pragmatic bunch.

On ‎9‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 1:15 PM, BTM_Pix said:

Its alright, Nikon have put last week's PR clangers behind them by coming up with a whole different one to start this week with.

A Nikon director of R&D has given quite a candid interview in China and come out with this :

"Nikon customer base is very broad, from novice to enthusiasts to prosumer to professional, that’s Nikon’s advantage. Olympus, Sony and Fujifilm can only cover a small part of that. So far there is no professional using their products. So when they develop products, even like retro style, they only try to meet these people and that’s only what they can do. Their customer base is limited anyway so they have limited view in developing products."

And concluded on this really inspiring note :

"...before A9 was introduced, Sony went through a lot failure internally. Nikon has a lot more failure experience than Sony."

https://nikonrumors.com/2017/09/15/new-interview-with-tetsuro-goto-from-nikon-full-frame-is-the-trend-if-nikon-will-go-mirrorless-it-must-be-full-frame.aspx/#ixzz4sy7LQksS

 

Lol....like those vapourware RX100 clones they announced, then failed to be able to actually manufacture.

Apparently Nikon considers failure normal. Sony, who made equivalent products, however did NOT fail. 

On ‎9‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 1:48 PM, Mattias Burling said:

Sorry if I offended you, it was just a joke.

I just couldn't carry on the debate because I dont believe your moms story to be exactly true.

Im NOT calling her a liar.

Its just that statistically she has been discriminated against several times through out her career. Be it salary, missed opportunities, asked to get coffee, etc.

And saying all is fine because of this one person and ignoring the bigger picture is a major part of the problem.

Nikon did nothing wrong because this one woman in another part of the world doesn't "feel" discriminated against at her workplace.

Again, sorry if my joke struck a nerve.

BTW, if you want to discuss journalism Im in. I even have a degree in it plus years of working experience as a radio reporter.

Well, I have been discriminated in the past several times in my career as well, as in salaries, missed opportunities, asked to get coffee etc. But I am a guy. So, if it happens to a guy, it is considered "normal", but if it happens to a girl it is "discrimination"? What is good for the goose is surely good for the gander.

On ‎9‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 12:58 AM, Mattias Burling said:

This sort of talk is simply not true. Not even the part about profit since its proven that a diverse company are more efficient and makes more profit than one that's not.
They hire men because they are men.

On another note,
Why people still deny reality and go of into fantasy land I will never understand. It cant be because of an orange president, it must be some sort of gender fanboy mechanism.

 

No, they hire mostly men because the majority of applicants for those positions are men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎9‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 7:32 AM, Damphousse said:

Why not?  Plenty of scientific papers prove that diversity in and of itself is a good thing.  You wouldn't read a diverstiy of books?  You wouldn't eat a diversity of foods?  You wouldn't travel to a diversity of places?  Why do all these gymnastics to fight common sense?  We spend our whole lives seeking diversity but when it comes to people all of a sudden OH NO we must avoid it?

When it comes to efficiency and productivity the only thing that matters is ability and competence, nothing else. Companies that hire less able and less competent people purely to meet some arbitrary diversity goal are going to less efficient and less productive as a result. That might be fine in a non-competitive business environment, such as a government service organization for example, but for companies that face real cut throat competition it is a recipe for failure. That is why places like Apple and all those other tech companies have the appearance of promoting diversity but behind the scenes it is ability that predominates. And yes, I know we don't live in a perfect world, some incompetent people will slip through, but in general a company that is lean and mean will have far fewer of those.

The issue of diversity and discrimination comes up when hires and promotions are made IN SPITE of ability and experience. When you are making personnel decisions based purely on your desire to have a priority for a particular gender or race, it is just as bad no matter what side of the line you are standing on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, tugela said:

It could be that the people swarming the stores for the latest high tech gadget are, for the most part, not female (you might comment on why that is from a social point of view, but it is a fact), and that the Nikon execs are, for the most part, a pragmatic bunch.

A company generally doesn't count its profit from the first few days of (I agree mostly men) buying the latest camera, like the D850.  It counts them up at the end of each quarter.  After a few months, I wager a lot of those (non) buyers will be women.  I believe those marketing execs who did this have a distorted, life-in-a-bubble, view of camera buyers.  My guess is that after the numbers come in, and I believe they will be short some women, those marketing execs will experience the fallacy of confusing first-buyers with all buyers through the size of their bonuses, which will be ZERO :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, tugela said:

When it comes to efficiency and productivity the only thing that matters is ability and competence, nothing else. Companies that hire less able and less competent people purely to meet some arbitrary diversity goal are going to less efficient and less productive as a result. 

Entire doctoral dissertations are written on single aspects "efficiency and productivity" so I'm going to guess a random guy on a video forum isn't going to have a definitive iron clad answer to a broad set of topics in business which are debated in the top corporations and business schools in the world.  That is one of the most absurd sentences I have ever read.

19 hours ago, tugela said:

That might be fine in a non-competitive business environment, such as a government service organization for example, but for companies that face real cut throat competition it is a recipe for failure.

Lol.  Yeah I guess that is why the US government dug the Panama Canal, created the atomic bomb in record time, put a man on the moon in the 1960s, invented the internet, and can get a piece of mail from Key West to Alaska in a few days for 49 cents.

19 hours ago, tugela said:

That is why places like Apple and all those other tech companies have the appearance of promoting diversity but behind the scenes it is ability that predominates.

Apple isn't a great company because it has a kick ass HR department.  It is a great company because of Steve Jobs.  You could give Steve Jobs any group of reasonably competent engineers and he would give you the number one smartphone in the world.  And apple isn't like "all those other tech companies".  Most of the big ones you hear about in the press constantly have never made a penny for their shareholders Uber, Twitter, snapchat, Zynga, Pandora, Zillow, etc.  These aren't models of efficiency or productivity.  They are Ponzi schemes.  Come back in 10 years and most of them will not exist as stand alone profitable going concerns... Just like the last tech boom. 

By the way Steve Jobs is the son of a Syrian migrant from Homs.  The orange Führer would have banned Steve Jobs from even entering the country.  I'm just glad our immigration policy back then encouraged more diversity.  Truly if you look at the great successes in business you will find that a lot of them have nothing to do with being the most efficient nor productive.  There are so many successes that are due to creativity, chance events, connections, luck, etc.

Look at phablet phones.  Samsung basically invented the entire segment.  They didn't invent it because they are more "efficient and productive" than apple.  They invented it because for whatever reason Koreans prefer larger phones than Americans.  That's it.  Purely a cultural thing.  Mirrorless would have died long time ago if it was up to the American consumer but for whatever reason mirrorless is just more desirable in Japan.  It has nothing to do with "efficiency and productivity".  It is just a different culture.  And I for one thank God for the diversity.

20 hours ago, tugela said:

 And yes, I know we don't live in a perfect world, some incompetent people will slip through, but in general a company that is lean and mean will have far fewer of those.

Given what happened in the tech boom and the financial crisis and what is going on with tech unicorns in silicon valley I would say gross incompetence is the norm vs the exception.  Given the size and nature of the multi trillion dollar disasters that have occurred in the last two decades alone I simply can't believe giving someone with a vagina or dark skin a job is the worst possible thing that could happen.  It can't be worse than what is happening now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to bring another dimension to the conversation, try not to exclude the rest of the world from your thoughts.

women are considered "inferior" to men in the 7/10 of this planet, or worst.

In US only, 1 out of 6 females has been raped or being attempted to.

In Turkey, the most western of the Muslim countries, women wearing shorter skirts or shorts are beaten up in the streets.

In Europe, far right parties are winning electoral power with every new election.

There is some form of discrimination against women happening close to you, almost everyday.

Let's not pretend that we have solved all humanities issues altogether, and now we just can have a good laugh about it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Let's not pretend that we have solved all humanities issues altogether

I don't believe Andrew posted this, or we have responded, to get laughs?  Anyway, I believe there are more problems created, not solved, here on EOSHD (okay, that's a joke :)  .... well, sort of )  Nikon showed prejudice, not us, I think?  Sorry, don't understand what you're driving at. Can you elaborate? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@maxotics

..just that there are serious issues about sex (race, religion too) in the world, that huge companies like Nikon have to be more careful with their marketing department's output. Plus, discrimination is a very real thing in the world, happening all the time, and for various reasons, humanity have to protect minorities and "different" people, not the opposite, or else we are sailing to very dangerous waters. (I expressed a general opinion, not intended to anyone specific). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/23/2017 at 5:48 AM, Damphousse said:

Lol.  Yeah I guess that is why the US government dug the Panama Canal, created the atomic bomb in record time, put a man on the moon in the 1960s, invented the internet, and can get a piece of mail from Key West to Alaska in a few days for 49 cents.

Do you feel creating the atomic bomb was a net gain for humanity? I doubt it. 
Was putting a man on the moon the best use of billions and billions and billions and billions of dollars? It was just a big dick waving competition with the USSR. I feel society would have flourished more if that money had been left with those who earned it, to spend as they saw best, rather than being stolen away to finance the space race.
The US Postal Service is operating at a massive loss. 

You didn't give particularly good examples of government :-/ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/23/2017 at 5:48 AM, Damphousse said:

Apple isn't a great company because it has a kick ass HR department.  It is a great company because of Steve Jobs.  You could give Steve Jobs any group of reasonably competent engineers and he would give you the number one smartphone in the world. 

No. Part of the reason why Apple was so successful is exactly because Jobs put great engineers in place at his company (and yes, that means partly having a great HR department in place too, to recruit them). 

Or have you so quickly forgotten Steve Wozniak? He was just the first of many great engineers to work for Apple. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Was putting a man on the moon the best use of billions and billions and billions and billions of dollars?

Yes.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/dec/16/apollo-legacy-moon-space-riley

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/hidden-figures/technology-from-the-space-race/

http://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/10-tech-breakthroughs-to-thank-the-space-race-for-617847

And so much more. The space race drove an a huge wave of technology and miniaturisation that made it possible to have cell phones, laptops, GPS, and digital cameras. Whatever the US Government paid in grants and funding and investing in innovation it is still being paid back for in taxes paid by companies, employees of those companies, and the sales taxes for each product sold. In fact the space race is government spending at its best -- private enterprise can't take the risks that governments can in exploration, and without discovery we won't open new markets.
 

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

The US Postal Service is operating at a massive loss.

And without the USPS you wouldn't have eBay or Amazon. Without cheap, (relatively) reliable delivery internet shopping might not have caught on the way it did as quickly as it did. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jhnkng said:

Yes

No. 

You forget about the unseen. What many discoveries are we missing due to the lack of private spending? Because it was sucked out of the economy by the government. 

1 hour ago, jhnkng said:

And without the USPS you wouldn't have eBay or Amazon. Without cheap, (relatively) reliable delivery internet shopping might not have caught on the way it did as quickly as it did. 


There are private couriers too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

You forget about the unseen. What many discoveries are we missing due to the lack of private spending? Because it was sucked out of the economy by the government. 

You understand that the US Government didn't do the actual scientific work? They just paid for it. And they didn't pay for it by imposing a big new tax (which is how governments remove money from the economy), they spent money -- thereby injecting money into the economy. And even if you argue the bulk of that money went to government agencies like NASA, NASA had to hire a ton of new engineers and scientists and admin/support staff, who then spent their money on food and living and other stuff, thereby spreading all that extra money the government was spending into the wider economy. I mean I suppose if you looked hard enough you would find some area of study that fell by the wayside because funding was diverted to the space effort, but when people have jobs they tend to spend money, and when there's a lot of money moving around freely that's when companies make more money and can spend more money on R&D. 

I have no idea how you can quantify unseen un-discoveries in the 60s directly due to the space race, but I think the giant leap in technological advances in medicine, computing, aeronautics, materials science, telecommunications, geology, not to mention the huge cultural impact and the inspiration it gave to a whole generation of kids to work in science and engineering... I think it was worth it.

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

There are private couriers too.

But they were expensive. The USPS made it cheap enough for people to try it out to understand how convenient it can be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...