Publicly traded companies even if they do "charity", they do it expecting good PR in return. Any other kind of charity (i.e. done without publicity, only to make the world a better place) would be against their duty to the shareholders.
You're just bringing up the tired thought experiment about whether "true altruism" exists. Is it really corporate "charity" if the company expects good PR and eventually profit as a result? Is it really individual "charity" if the person gets a really good feeling as a result?
If real kids are getting real flu shots or whatever, who cares about the PR? Getting personal satisfaction from charitable giving doesn't make your donation less valuable.
"You're only saving me from a life-threatening illness because you have a big ego! I don't want your charity," said no one ever.
Is your point that we shouldn't be supportive of corporations doing charity?
There are corporations which have rationally (long-term profit-wise, or whatever) decided to do charity work. There are corporations which have decided not to. I support the former.
Comments
google doesn't throw her money away !! I'm positively sure that they will get it double a triple :) they don't do charity
Google actually does a lot of charity
http://www.google.com/giving/
Publicly traded companies even if they do "charity", they do it expecting good PR in return. Any other kind of charity (i.e. done without publicity, only to make the world a better place) would be against their duty to the shareholders.
You're just bringing up the tired thought experiment about whether "true altruism" exists. Is it really corporate "charity" if the company expects good PR and eventually profit as a result? Is it really individual "charity" if the person gets a really good feeling as a result?
If real kids are getting real flu shots or whatever, who cares about the PR? Getting personal satisfaction from charitable giving doesn't make your donation less valuable.
"You're only saving me from a life-threatening illness because you have a big ego! I don't want your charity," said no one ever.
Is your point that we shouldn't be supportive of corporations doing charity?
There are corporations which have rationally (long-term profit-wise, or whatever) decided to do charity work. There are corporations which have decided not to. I support the former.
Due to dual-class structure Google realistically has only two shareholders. The only legally mandated duty is quarterly report of the numbers.
google.org is their charitable extension.