Companies That Do Good

You often hear negative stories about companies, yet rarely hear about the positive. In light of that, what are the positive stories of companies that you know of?

Here's some from Pixar -
Pixar held a private screening of their movie, Up, to a dying girl as her final wish.

"HUNTINGTON BEACH, Calif. — Colby Curtin got her final wish.
The 10-year-old girl desperately wanted to see the new Disney-Pixar movie, “Up.” But the cancer-stricken girl was too sick to go to a theater.

Thanks to a family friend who got in touch with the movie studio Pixar, an employee of the Emeryville-based company arrived at Colby’s home with a DVD copy of the movie, The Orange County Register reported Friday. The girl died later that night

Full story

And one from Gearbox -
Gearbox return to their finished game, Borderlands 2, to insert a new character in memory of a Borderlands 1 fan, Michael John Mamaril, and record a eulogy too.

This morning, we received an email from a Destructoid fan named Carlo who shared a story about his late friend Michael John Mamaril. Last month, Michael passed away due to cancer at the young age of 22. Both were huge Borderlands fans, so Carlo thought a great way to honor his buddy's memory would be to shoot Gearbox Software an email asking for a short eulogy to be read by the game's smart-mouthed robot mascot Claptrap. Not only did Gearbox comply with the request, it also promised to insert Michael into the upcoming Borderlands 2 as an NPC.

Full Article
Eulogy here-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wBGA9k2kZU

Surely there have to be more - what do you have, AH?

kneemos

They're what's known as PR stunts.Sorry to burst your bubble op.

donvito99

Dey tuk ur jabs, Joe

Madam_X

kneemos wrote: »

They're what's known as PR stunts.Sorry to burst your bubble op.

Still though, they'd be criticised for *not* doing anything charitable - better to do so than not IMO.

Gi joe!

kneemos wrote: »

They're what's known as PR stunts.Sorry to burst your bubble op.

Really? So employees of Pixar weren't touched at all from granting a terminally ill little girl her last wish to see one of their films? Or Gearbox having the opportunity to memorialize one of their fans who passed away? You think they did this all in the name of publicity?

grenache

There are very few multi-national companies doing good. Too busy exploiting Indo-Asian kids in sweatshops.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

grenache wrote: »

There are very few multi-national companies doing good. Too busy exploiting Indo-Asian kids in sweatshops.

by "exploiting" do you mean "providing employment to keep them off the street, away from drugs and western sex tourists?"

Senna

Yeah, when a big company does something nice there's always someone in PR rubbing their hands, but someone else in the company is probably doing it for the right reasons.

A shop in Sligo got a phone call from a mother who said her little girl had lost her favourite teddy and they "think" she lost it in their store. An employee when out to the bins and found it, then posted it back to the girl. Wasn't in any papers etc, i heard it from the mother, really nice of them to take the effort to find it when they could have just ignored the call.

Pottler

I raised a decent sum of money for a major company I deal with through an unexpected commercial windfall - I paid it in, but their accounts dept could not find an area to reference it to so did not want to accept it. It was due to them, not me, so I paid it in and was not taking it back as fairs fair. They donated it to Crumlin childrens hospital, which I thought was a pretty decent thing to do. It was a nice chunk of change as well, 000's, not 00's.

kneemos

Gi joe! wrote: »

Really? So employees of Pixar weren't touched at all from granting a terminally ill little girl her last wish to see one of their films? Or Gearbox having the opportunity to memorialize one of their fans who passed away? You think they did this all in the name of publicity?

Of course it was for publicity,your a bit naive to think otherwise I'm afraid.

SafeSurfer

Gi joe! wrote: »

Really? So employees of Pixar weren't touched at all from granting a terminally ill little girl her last wish to see one of their films? Or Gearbox having the opportunity to memorialize one of their fans who passed away? You think they did this all in the name of publicity?

If they had kept it quiet then I wouldn't be cynical. JK Rowling read the latest Harry Potter book to a dying child in then States, as she wrote it. Then she donated half of the profits of the book and film rights to the care of children with cancer. ( I made that last bit up).

The King of Moo

kneemos wrote: »

Of course it was for publicity,your a bit naive to think otherwise I'm afraid.

Disney are hardly starved of publicity. They'd probably do just fine without this happening.

How many more people heard about the purchase of Lucasfilm than heard about what they did for the little girl?

With regards to the Pixar story - we don't know who told them about it. For all we know, it was the mother who had gone forward to the press.

wexie

grenache wrote: »

There are very few multi-national companies doing good. Too busy exploiting Indo-Asian kids in sweatshops.

hmm....plenty of companies donating time and money to good causes, or allowing employees to donate (paid) company time to charities.

Salesforce allow their staff a day a month for charity I believe. Something similar with Dell, they are also big into various charities like Daffodil day, shoebox appeal (which I think is a great one. Microsoft do something similar and I'm sure so do many large multinationals.

I'm sure you could argue they could do more (which might well be the case).

But....fact is they're still doing things (which cost them, or their staff, a lot of money.) Which they don't need to. And....believe it or not...in many cases not widely publicised even.

kneemos

The King of Moo wrote: »

Disney are hardly starved of publicity. They'd probably do just fine without this happening.

How many more people heard about the purchase of Lucasfilm than heard about what they did for the little girl?

We're talking about it.

Lyaiera

When Cork flooded a few years ago the supermarkets all put up the prices of water. A friend of mine was without water for quite a while and the council couldn't set up water dispensing areas fast enough. Within hours of the water shutting down the local off license reduced the price of all their water to cost price, they were driving back and forth to a cash and carry every few hours to keep their stock levels up, they rationed the water so everyone could get some, and they delivered water to the elderly and people with disabilities. I will always have the utmost respect for the owners of that shop.

The King of Moo

kneemos wrote: »

We're talking about it.

Go look at the thread about the Lucasfilm purchase in the Film Forum. I think there's a few more people talking about that.

Also, you're saying negative things about it, which is hardly what Disney would've wanted were this merely a publicity stunt.
All publicity is not necessarily good publicity.

Shane-KornSpace

Korn wrote a song called Justin for a kid who met them through the Make A Wish Foundation.
Nice thing to do.

cson

Well me and my brother have a company called Holy Shirts and Pants; we take the the fur or the wool from sheep and we turn it into thread for homeless people to sew. And then they make it into cloth, which they in turn sew to make some shirts and pants for other homeless people to sell. It's a pretty good deal. I think we're doing good. No website yet, but feel free to PM me for details if you want to help out.

SafeSurfer

Some kids are more equal than other in the eyes of benevolent multi nationals.

Good deeds and charity are great. But I think it would be more meaningful for large corporations to start with looking after the welfare of kids who work for them, even if indirectly.

The sad fact is that there is more profit in a feel good story about how they were nice to a dying child in a rich country than how they treat child labourers in poor ones.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/aug/27/disney-factory-sweatshop-suicide-claims

kneemos

The King of Moo wrote: »

Go look at the thread about the Lucasfilm purchase in the Film Forum. I think there's a few more people talking about that.

Also, you're saying negative things about it, which is hardly what Disney would've wanted were this merely a publicity stunt.
All publicity is not necessarily good publicity.

Not really saying it's a bad thing,the charity gets a donation and the company gets publicity,I think most people are aware of the relationship.

hardCopy

wexie wrote: »

hmm....plenty of companies donating time and money to good causes, or allowing employees to donate (paid) company time to charities.

Salesforce allow their staff a day a month for charity I believe. Something similar with Dell, they are also big into various charities like Daffodil day, shoebox appeal (which I think is a great one. Microsoft do something similar and I'm sure so do many large multinationals.

I'm sure you could argue they could do more (which might well be the case).

But....fact is they're still doing things (which cost them, or their staff, a lot of money.) Which they don't need to. And....believe it or not...in many cases not widely publicised even.

Same in a multinational I used to work for. Every month or so there would be a charity poker night, soccer tournament, pub quiz, musical etc.

Staff would spend paid time painting houses, digging gardens and building websites for various charities.

Staff could also work on secondment to third world charities on 1/3rd or 1/2 pay for up to a year.

I worked there for 4 years and never saw a single press release or any media coverage of it.

Madam_X

Not every charity campaign is going to have a PR machine behind it though - Bill Gates gives a lot to charity and that's all I've heard, nothing specific. And that information could easily get out via word of mouth seeing as how well known and influential a figure he is.
If a company does a good deed but there is no PR campaign for it, I think it would be churlish to view it solely as a publicity stunt. Press may pick up on it, but as said, it's not necessarily the company that tells them.

kowloon

I was in a chippers and a homeless guy came in. They gave him free chips.
A charity packing Christmas presents for children in Africa relies on businesses to provide the warehouse space for collecting.
Two examples I can think of off the top of my head.

DEFTLEFTHAND

I'm sure all big companies will work with the Make A Wish Foundation (or similar organisations) if they're approached to do something for a sick child. I know you could take a cynical view on the reasons they get involved but a lot of times the wishes they grant go unpublicised.

Capt'n Midnight

grenache wrote: »

There are very few multi-national companies doing good. Too busy exploiting Indo-Asian kids in sweatshops.

Actually they are too busy with tax avoidance schemes. Heard a statistic that up to 1/3 of execs time is spent on this.

Capt'n Midnight

wexie wrote: »

hmm....plenty of companies donating time and money to good causes, or allowing employees to donate (paid) company time to charities.

Was told that one bank only let it's staff engage in non-political charities, like cleaning a local beach.

1ZRed

kneemos wrote: »

They're what's known as PR stunts.Sorry to burst your bubble op.

True, that could be the case but I don't think an act like that should be viewed so cynically because it doesn't change the fact that it did good in the end and that's all that would matter to me.

uberalles

wexie wrote: »

hmm....plenty of companies donating time and money to good causes, or allowing employees to donate (paid) company time to charities.

Salesforce allow their staff a day a month for charity I believe. Something similar with Dell, they are also big into various charities like Daffodil day, shoebox appeal (which I think is a great one. Microsoft do something similar and I'm sure so do many large multinationals.

I'm sure you could argue they could do more (which might well be the case).

But....fact is they're still doing things (which cost them, or their staff, a lot of money.) Which they don't need to. And....believe it or not...in many cases not widely publicised even.

In dells case the publicity is cringe worthy

Canis Lupus

I currently work for Virgin Australia (airline). Some old lady missed a connecting flight and her family couldn't get in touch with her (she also didn't speak english).

Fella here at the call centre was dealing with it but finished his shift as it was close to midnight. He went home initially leaving the matter with a colleague but then couldn't sleep so drove out to the airport himself, found the old lady alone in a terminal. Sorted out a hotel for her etc etc.

Not really sure that's a 'company' doing good but well done that man nevertheless.

grenache

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

by "exploiting" do you mean "providing employment to keep them off the street, away from drugs and western sex tourists?"

Ah, the lesser of two evils. That makes it ok then.

pickarooney

Madam_X wrote: »

Not every charity campaign is going to have a PR machine behind it though - Bill Gates gives a lot to charity and that's all I've heard, nothing specific. And that information could easily get out via word of mouth seeing as how well known and influential a figure he is.
If a company does a good deed but there is no PR campaign for it, I think it would be churlish to view it solely as a publicity stunt. Press may pick up on it, but as said, it's not necessarily the company that tells them.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a very well known charity - the largest private charity in the world if I'm not mistaken. Don't get me wrong, it's good that it is so well known; I'm just surprised you've never heard of it.

upandcumming

Coca Cola do good work by producing Coca Cola for me to drink.

kneemos

upandcumming wrote: »

Coca Cola do good work by producing Coca Cola for me to drink.

And add caffeine to ensure you keep drinking it.

WoollyRedHat

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

by "exploiting" do you mean "providing employment to keep them off the street, away from drugs and western sex tourists?"

So was the same thing justifiable back in the day of workhouses in the Western world? Keep them working all day long, keep them out of trouble, treat them like **** to boot.

Just because there are expoloitative people on the street, doesn't give corporations the right to be exploitative too.

mandrake04

Canis Lupus wrote: »

I currently work for Virgin Australia (airline). Some old lady missed a connecting flight and her family couldn't get in touch with her (she also didn't speak english).

Fella here at the call centre was dealing with it but finished his shift as it was close to midnight. He went home initially leaving the matter with a colleague but then couldn't sleep so drove out to the airport himself, found the old lady alone in a terminal. Sorted out a hotel for her etc etc.

Not really sure that's a 'company' doing good but well done that man nevertheless.

I fly domestic a couple of times a week and always try to use Virgin now where possible, I once dropped my wallet once in the plane and had $300 cash plus all my cards didn't realise until they phoned me when I was on the Park n Fly bus saying they had my wallet. When I asked how did they get my number they said they checked my Velocity Gold number (which was in the wallet), I said I would come back and get it and that I was on the shuttle bus they said no need they would deliver the wallet to Park n Fly (10 minute drive). One of the guys drove out and give me the wallet and I tried to offer him $50 for his honesty and he refused to take it.

Great airline

optimistic_

kneemos wrote: »

And add caffeine to ensure you keep drinking it.

I'd say you're mighty craic at parties.

kneemos

optimistic_ wrote: »

I'd say you're mighty craic at parties.

Your future looks bright so here's a tip...if your going to insult someone keep it original.Now I want to see some good work from you.

Piliger

1ZRed wrote: »

True, that could be the case but I don't think an act like that should be viewed so cynically because it doesn't change the fact that it did good in the end and that's all that would matter to me.

When a company does something bad - they are satan's evil. When they do good they are cynical publicity stunts ..... some people are life prisoners of their own cynical dogma.

Companies do good things every day - they provide jobs and salaries.

optimistic_

kneemos wrote: »

Your future looks bright so here's a tip...if your going to insult someone keep it original.Now I want to see some good work from you.

Ah come on, my future insulting people is not very bright. I'm not too good at it.
Overt cynicism is very tiresome though.

opinion guy

Lyaiera wrote: »

When Cork flooded a few years ago the supermarkets all put up the prices of water. A friend of mine was without water for quite a while and the council couldn't set up water dispensing areas fast enough. Within hours of the water shutting down the local off license reduced the price of all their water to cost price, they were driving back and forth to a cash and carry every few hours to keep their stock levels up, they rationed the water so everyone could get some, and they delivered water to the elderly and people with disabilities. I will always have the utmost respect for the owners of that shop.

Amazingly enough Anheuser Busch have a great track record for this kind of thing going back as far as 1906 earthquake in San Fran up until Hurricane Sandy
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/11/03/anheuser-busch-halts-beer-to-make-water-for-sandy-victims/

I guess its penance for inflicting Budweiser on the world :P

pickarooney wrote: »

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a very well known charity - the largest private charity in the world if I'm not mistaken. Don't get me wrong, it's good that it is so well known; I'm just surprised you've never heard of it.

Its also nothing to do with Microsoft as Bill is retired. Its just about two people with more money than they know what to do with it - finding something good to do with it - more power to them.

CruelCoin

Gi joe! wrote: »

Really? So employees of Pixar weren't touched at all from granting a terminally ill little girl her last wish to see one of their films? Or Gearbox having the opportunity to memorialize one of their fans who passed away? You think they did this all in the name of publicity?

Yes, yes they did.

Companies like that are not in the habit of spending money and time for the sake of it.

Everything little thing they do is done to maximise profits (which is well and proper). In this case easy pr.

opinion guy

Another good deed from Gearbox....
http://www.destructoid.com/borderlands-claptrap-and-anthony-burch-play-cupid-199517.phtml

its pretty funny actually

Da Shins Kelly

CruelCoin wrote: »

Yes, yes they did.

Companies like that are not in the habit of spending money and time for the sake of it.

Everything little thing they do is done to maximise profits (which is well and proper). In this case easy pr.

It's still a nice thing to do for a child. People are very cynical.

kneemos

optimistic_ wrote: »

Ah come on, my future insulting people is not very bright. I'm not too good at it.
Overt cynicism is very tiresome though.

Better cynical than boring.

Da Shins Kelly

kneemos wrote: »

Better cynical than boring.

Because people who revel in their own cynicism are so interesting. :rolleyes:

kneemos

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Because people who revel in their own cynicism are so interesting. :rolleyes:

Why yes I am.

BillyMitchel

Does the Ronald McDonald parents house in Crumlin kids hospital count?? Always wondered if they done it out of the goodness of their little yellow hearts.

CruelCoin

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

It's still a nice thing to do for a child. People are very cynical.

But the giving of aid to a child for the sake of good pr is cynical in the extreme!

Were it genuine, i'd imagine they'd keep it quiet instead.

Da Shins Kelly

CruelCoin wrote: »

But the giving of aid to a child for the sake of good pr is cynical in the extreme!

Were it genuine, i'd imagine they'd keep it quiet instead.

Well, it's not exactly front page news. I'd never heard about it until now. And who's to say that Pixar put it out there? Maybe the family of the child did. I accept that it helps with PR, but it's making a child happy. What exactly is wrong with that? The people complaining about this are the same people who complain that big companies never do anything for anyone, then the second they do, there's immediate cynicism about the whole thing. You can't have it every way. As far as I see it, they did something nice for a kid, and there probably was some good intent behind it, even if PR was a factor. I don't believe that there was just a room full of people gleefully jumping on the opportunity for the purposes of PR without even thinking about the fact that it's just a good deed. I mean just because they're part of a big company, doesn't mean they're not human.

CruelCoin

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

I mean just because they're part of a big company, doesn't mean they're not human.

Publicly traded companies are allllll about the profit, seriously.

There are very few companies that can afford to do things for the lulz, and still be profitable.