Re: “Chick-fil-A controversy odious – and so too is some of the reaction” (TNT, 8-1).
I was and remain bothered by Lane Filler’s commentary about Chick-fil-A’s financial support of a particular social agenda. Apparently that was just the one of the fronts taken by a member of the news media. Now Chick-fil-A protesters are receiving additional media attention in a variety of formats.
What about corporations that have supported the other side of this issue? It seems to be OK with the news media that Starbucks, Microsoft, Amazon, Nike and others have financially supported a social agenda from one position, yet when a position is taken by a company with a differing opinion that company is lambasted by the media.
Personally, I would prefer that companies keep their finances and views private. However, since that isn’t the case then how about some equality about how these things are presented? It takes courage to take a public stand – regardless of one’s personal outlook.