- Joined
- Jan 25, 2015
I'm pretty sure this is a classic case of Nintendo being as utterly unaware of the outside world again (see also, them discovering the internet only 2-3 years ago). I don't think they quite realize that with the full context of this situation, that last remarks almost reads off like "We're willing to ignore the fact that one of our employees - who's job is to be one of our public faces - is openly championing the idea of being able to view illegal content that wouldn't exist if someone didn't hold a child down and fuck them against their will." The cluelessness of all this is fucking baffling to me.
EDIT:
When it comes to PR and controversy, you have to factor in what investors care most about, and that's simply "cost". If you have a even a model employee who is involved in a controversy outside of your ability to fire them over, the the 'cost' of keeping that employee goes up. Yes, that's the point where said employee is on a hair trigger, and they'll gladly find any little excuse to fire you if it's costing the company too much resources to have to dodge, deflect, or otherwise shuffle around big controversies like this. Even if it's not costing them any direct monetary value, someone out there (or even the employee in question) is diverting time and attention to something they could be spending time and attention promoting your shit. It's a waste of resources one way or another, and that's the real reason why she's being let go over something seemingly petty.
Last edited:
