And now we see LeBron James chiming in to say that Morey was “misinformed” when tweeting support for the Hong Kong people.
More money talking. His brand will take a hit so he wants to remain neutral … which isn’t surprising. Money rules the world.
Playing devils advocate, while the 1st amendment should be honored always, talking sometimes comes with repercussions and we all sometimes say things that we wouldn’t normally say (or hold back from saying) due to context.
As a side note, he was actually one of the players on one of 5 teams that were IN China when Morey sent that tweet.
Whether he truly felt threatened or whether it’s just a money thing, we may never know but regardless Morey’s timing wasn’t all that great.
But this isn’t neutrality. By calling Morey “misinformed” and “uneducated,” LeBron is taking China’s side on the issue.
If he wanted to remain “neutral,” he would have said “no comment” or something of that sort.
The irony is that this won’t sway anyone in China. The CCP propaganda machine and it’s state run media lackey’s are in full gear now. Along with the trade war the Chinese public is already in anti-western company mode anyway, so his statement isn’t going to do anything except perhaps piss off his fans back in the US.
This attempt by western companies to stick their nose up the CCP’s ass hasn’t ever really worked well. But our companies and seemingly politicians and sports stars never seem to learn any lessons and they keep trying to do it…
His neutrality was wishing that Morey had said “no comment”
Without evident irony, James later admitted that he had no idea whether Morey was actually misinformed or not. “I have no idea, but that is just my belief.”
(emphasis mine)
You just don’t grok this whole “capitalism” thing, do you ? 
Photo-service company Shutterstock No. 2 executive tells employees who disagree with its censorship (hiding images the Chinese government finds objectionable) policy to work elsewhere.
I would hope, at some point soon, that a prominent US cultural touchpoint becomes effectively boycotting any company who cooperates with an overseas’ government’s demands for censorship. As long as there is a competitor with similar services and pricing, I would think this could be a very effective line of marketing – i.e. “unlike the other guys, we refuse to cooperate with censorship by repressive regimes”.
Problem is, they all want a taste of the Chinese market. Google stood up to China back in 2010, but they probably regret doing so. And shutterstock is a more vulnerable business than Google. They’re not in a position to piss off China when they know they have competition that would gladly swoop right in and take their share of the market.
It’s probably up to ordinary people and prominent congressmen/women to shame the shit out of them. Protecting democracy and freedom of thought can’t be up to some whistleblower who can easily be replaced; it’s up to ordinary people. And unfortunately, I don’t think most of us are really up to the task.
Capitalism could have a role if a savvy competitor tried to weaponize it. Or at least I’d like to see someone try – some up and coming service tries to take a chunk of US market share by hammering this message in advertising, that Shutterstock (or whoever) censors for repressive China, but we would never do such a terrible thing! And, by the way, switch over right now with 1 MONTH FREE and we’ll pay your contract separation fee!
has anyone else seen the irony of a future CEO named Pavlovsky salivating at Chinese money?
A bit late, but this story is relevant:
Your link is paywalled. Why is he being expelled? This is all I can see:
SYDNEY—An Australian university is threatening to expel and take legal action against a student known for his criticism of Beijing, in a case that has renewed tensions over Chinese influence in higher education.
Drew Pavlou, a 20-year-old philosophy student at the University of Queensland, walked out about 45 minutes into a disciplinary hearing Wednesday. He said the university wasn’t adhering to “common standards of procedural fairness.” He was facing allegations he violated university policy, harassed staff and students,…
How did he harass staff and students?