DEI backlash: Apple shareholders prepare to vote on 'radical' programs, contributions to 'partisan' groups
Apple's board is asking shareholders to vote "no" on proposals criticizing the company's contributions to progressive groups and calling on the tech corporation to end its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs.
Fox News Digital analyzed the "Notice of 2025 Annual Meeting of Shareholders" and found that shareholders are requesting that Apple consider abolishing its Inclusion and Diversity program, policies, departments, and goals.
Proposal 6, initially proposed by the National Center for Public Policy Research, suggests that these practices pose "obvious risks" and that the company's omission of "equity" from program titles is "meaningless" since it still expresses multiple explicit commitments to "equity."
The shareholder also claims that Apple's policies are consistent with, "if not more radical than" most corporate DEI programs.
The proposal highlights Alphabet, Meta, Microsoft, and Zoom, just a handful of companies that have rolled back DEI efforts. The shareholder says these programs pose "litigation, reputational, and financial risks."
The National Center for Public Policy Research also took issue with Apple's "Supplier Diversity Program," which, they claim, picks suppliers based on race and sex.
"With 80,000 employees, Apple likely has over 50,000 who are potentially victims of this type of discrimination. If even only a fraction of employees file suit, and only some of those prove successful, the cost to Apple could reach tens of billions of dollars," the proposal states.
Proposal 7, entered by Wayne Frantzen, who Inspire Investing LLC represents, criticized Apple's contributions to progressive organizations.
"Shareholders request that Apple Inc. report to shareholders annually, at reasonable expense and excluding confidential information, an analysis of how Apple Inc.'s contributions impact its risks related to discrimination against individuals based on their speech or religious exercise," the Notice of 2025 Annual Meeting of Shareholders states.
The proposal criticized Apple's contributions to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which shareholders say uses its "hate map" and "hate watch" to target political and religious groups, as well as individuals. Some of their criticisms specifically target Moms for Liberty, The Family Research Center, Dr. Ben Carson and more.
"Groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center have been criticized across the political spectrum as 'a partisan progressive hit operation' more interested in 'bludgeon[ing] mainstream politically conservative opponents' than upholding civil rights," the shareholder proposal notes.The proposal states that many companies, including John Deere, Jack Daniel's, Harley-Davidson, Lowes, Home Depot, Ford, and Coors, have already refocused charitable giving to represent "diverse views" held by their customers and employees.
"Many have also explicitly cut ties with the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) as a part of this effort. But Apple has supported many of these groups, including the SPLC and Center for American Progress and is a Platinum sponsor of HRC," the notice continues.
According to the shareholder, the HRC has led coalitions calling on major social media platforms to censor "hate speech and harassment" that includes many mainstream views on parental rights and human sexuality.
The HRC Corporate Equality Index also requires companies to provide "puberty blockers for youth" in their healthcare plans.
In 2017, Apple CEO Tim Cook announced that the company would donate $2 million to "anti-hate groups," including the SPLC.
Apple does not list SPLC or HRC on its Public Policy/Trade Association Membership website.
The 2024 edition of the Viewpoint Diversity Score Business found that 62% of scored companies, including Apple Inc., support nonprofits that are influencing public policy by actively attacking free speech and religious freedom.
Apple has previously been accused of pushing anti-free speech efforts.
In 2018, Buzzfeed initially reported that company leadership had instructed the creators of some Apple TV+ shows to avoid portraying China in a poor light.
Apple also rejected a Christian app in 2010 that opposed gay marriage, abortion and embryonic stem cell research.
Another app, "Parler," was delisted from the Apple Store in early 2021. Apple reinstated the app three months later but said it stood by the initial ban.
The Apple board recommends that shareholders vote "no" on proposals 6 and 7 during the 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting on February 25.
When asked for comment, Apple referred Fox News Digital to the company's statements opposing the two proposals in the meeting notes.
In these statements, Apple notes that the board and management maintain active oversight of legal and regulatory risks and compliance for global business.
In the case of proposal 6, Apple claims that it is "unnecessary" as the company "already has a well-established compliance program." The proposal also inappropriately attempts to restrict Apple's ability to manage its ordinary business operations, people and teams, and business strategies.
Regarding Proposal 7, Apple said, in part, the following: "The proposal is unnecessary as Apple has a well-established corporate donations program that follows a strict internal governance and approval process and the proposal attempts to inappropriately restrict Apple's ability to manage its own ordinary business operations and business strategies."
SPLC and HRC did not immediately return Fox News Digital's request for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The only ‘Made in America' smartphone maker has a message for Apple about manufacturing in the Trump tariff era
Todd Weaver has an important message for Apple as it faces growing demands by President Donald Trump to reshore some of its smartphone production: Don't listen to the conventional wisdom. Experts have long said that manufacturing iPhones in the U.S., rather than Asia, as Apple does, would be logistically impossible and ridiculously expensive. But Weaver argues companies can indeed do it successfully, and at a similar or only slightly higher cost—if given several years to navigate the inevitable complications. Weaver should know: His startup, Purism, is among the few, if not the only business, that assembles smartphones in the U.S. In fact, the U.S. pedigree is the main selling point of his company's Made in America device, the Liberty Phone. 'It is challenging to do this in the U.S.,' Weaver acknowledges. 'It's probably the reason I'm the only one.' And yet, he says his company has managed to make it work and has been profitable for the last two years—a real world example of what's possible on a hot-button topic in which political talking points and vested interests often dominate the debate. President Donald Trump recently put U.S. smartphone production in the spotlight as part of his global trade war. On May 23, he used social network Truth Social to publicly attack Apple for importing iPhones into the U.S., rather than making them domestically, and then threatened the company with a 25% tariff if it continued to do so. Whether any of the import taxes will become permanent is unclear given Trump's whiplash decision-making and court challenges by third parties. Still, Apple has long assembled its iPhones overseas, mainly in China, and has resisted relocating any of that production to the U.S. In April, when Trump announced his tariffs, Apple went so far as to shift the sourcing of most U.S.-bound iPhones to India, which faced lower import taxes. U.S. assembly was never publicly mentioned as a possibility. In the past, Apple CEO Cook explained the reluctance by saying the abundance of skilled labor and top-notch suppliers overseas would be difficult to reproduce at home. Weaver's company, of course, is no Apple, which has sold more than 2 billion iPhones globally since introducing the first models in 2007. The devices unleashed a new era in the tech industry in which mobile devices became the prime focus. Purism, in contrast, has sold just tens of thousands of phones since debuting its first model in 2018, according to Weaver. And the company is barely-known outside the world of tech nerds. Its Liberty Phone, manufactured near San Diego, comes with U.S.-made electronics installed on a metal chassis from China. It retails for $1,999. Another phone, the Librem 5, is mostly the same design, except it's made in China with Chinese parts, and costs $799. The company also produces tablet computers, laptops, and servers. Purism pitches its Made in America device as more secure and privacy friendly than those from major manufactures like Apple. Because all the critical parts and assembly are domestic, it's easy to verify that they haven't been tampered with by a foreign adversary that wants to snoop or stuff them with explosives. The phones also run on a Linux-based open source operating system. Anyone with technical know-how who is worried about the security can review the code—unlike with more popular phones, which come with operating systems that can't be easily inspected. Additionally, Purism's phones come with three kill switches that lets users physically disconnect their device from cell service, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, along with its microphone and camera. When turned on, the switches sever the electrical circuit to the features they control and make it impossible for them to be accessed by hackers, Weaver said. Toggling on Airplane Mode, as users often do on more mainstream phones, is less secure, he said, because it's a purely software feature that doesn't cut power to the device's chips. Customers who are especially security conscious can pay extra to have their devices shipped with 'tamper evident tape' on the packaging, among other options, to flag any monkey business during transit. Purism's biggest customers are government agencies, many of which require high security, and individual consumers. The company's clients, Weaver said, include the FBI and the House Select Committee on Intelligence. Weaver said the cost of manufacturing the Purism's two phones is largely the same, despite one being made overseas and the other domestically. The phone that's made in China costs around $600 for parts, manufacturing, and assembly while the U.S.-made one comes in at $650. 'Producing goods in China vs. the U.S. is the same plus or minus 10%,' said Weaver, based mostly on automation. The difference between what Purism charges customers for its two phones is partly due to the higher profit margin the company collects for its U.S.-made device. People who want stronger security are often willing to pay extra for it, Weaver said. It also covers the extra overhead from some customers wanting to verify that Purism's supply chain is secure and the small additional cost of U.S. manufacturing. Purism's assembly line is in Carlsbad, Calif., where up to a dozen workers put together devices. The area is home to a pool of skilled labor thanks to the local defense industry and manufacturing for other mobile carriers. That relatively modest assembly line is a major contrast to the factories that make iPhones, operated by contract manufacturers, mostly in China. Those facilities can be the size of several football fields and employ over 100,000 people who work around-the-clock shifts. Weaver said the U.S. is at a huge disadvantage to China when it comes to skilled workers, who make up a significant part of the workforce in smartphone factories. The only way to reverse the shortage and lay the groundwork for companies to reshore their production is to encourage more people to learn skills that are useful in the manufacturing process, he said. 'If you go over to China you can find buildings and buildings of thousands of electronics engineers. If you look here, you can find maybe five total,' Weaver said. Apple, for example, would risk a catastrophe if it suddenly, in 2026, needed to ramp up staffing in the U.S. to produce millions of iPhones, he said. Training enough people for such a massive undertaking would take years. Weaver said Purism, founded in 2014, took several years to develop its domestic supply chain. The company's small size means it only needs limited quantities of components, which makes it impossible to achieve the economies of scale that come from producing huge numbers of devices. Manufacturing in the U.S. also comes with higher labor costs than in China. But with the help of automation, those extra costs can be kept to a minimum by reserving human labor for tasks performed after production is complete, such as soldering, assembly, repairs, and testing. Apple, on the other hand, would need vast amounts of components to keep its assembly line humming. While the company would likely be able to cut deals with domestic suppliers for most iPhone parts, some, such as high-quality cameras, may be impossible to quickly source in the U.S. and it would therefore have to import them, Weaver said. One analyst has said iPhones could end up costing $3,500 if made in the U.S., to account for the extra costs and hassles. Weaver agrees that it would cost Apple substantially more to produce iPhones in the U.S., if it had to move production quickly. But given enough time, Apple could substantially reduce the cost after developing a new supply chain, finding enough workers, and by relying on extensive automation. For Apple, opening a domestic manufacturing plant would therefore need to be a years' long process, Weaver said. That's why he criticized Trump's tariffs for taking effect almost immediately. Yes, many of those tariffs have since been delayed. But the takeaway for businesses is that they can't plan ahead. And yet, that's exactly what's required for something as complex as shifting manufacturing to the U.S. Trump's tariffs would be far more effective if phased in over many years, Weaver said. In that scenario, companies would have a clear and increasing incentive to reshore production—without being punished right off the bat. Weaver argues his U.S. manufacturing effort is already paying off and that it will gain momentum over time. He hopes the recent scandal involving U.S. officials using the chat app Signal to discuss a military strike against Yemen, and then accidentally inviting a journalist to join them, will help lift sales by encouraging the federal government to focus more on security. Weaver wouldn't get into the specifics of Purism's financials other than to say it has millions in annual revenue and turned profitable in 2023. The Liberty Phone is its biggest seller. Wayne Lam, an analyst with market research firm TechInsights, gave a mixed take on Purism's prospect. In an email, he said: 'They can be a successful niche player, but the odds of success are lower thanks to the bigger brands. They won't be able to compete in the consumer market but government/enterprise/military are all niche markets they can address.' To fund the expansion of his business, Weaver is trying to raise additional investment after taking in $16 million in funding over the years. Some of that money would go to fixing a shortcoming with his phones. Because they don't use Apple's iOS or Google's Android operating systems, they are incompatible with many of the most popular mobile apps like Uber. To get such apps work on its devices, Purism must make technical tweaks for each one. Purism can at least claim one small advantage over the giant companies that dominate the smartphone industry. If Trump's tariffs become permanent, it won't feel much impact from its U.S.-made phone, while the big players and their foreign-made devices could be hammered. This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Apple Watch 圈圈真的準？美國有研究指 Apple Watch 部份運動數據追蹤表現準度不足
Yahoo購物節，6月2至13日正式舉行！集合全球精選著數的網上大型購物節：波鞋低至36折、手袋低至4折、自助餐半價、旅遊產品買一送一等，更有獨家優惠為您而設，把握限時兩星期優惠，1Click買盡全世界！ 早前消委會就發表智能手錶評測報告，強調智能手錶、手環的運動數據都是估算，只適宜作參考之用。其實智能手錶在追蹤不同數據時準度的確存在著誤差。最近美國就有研究指 Apple Watch 於運動時記錄燃燒了多少卡路里的數據，準度並不是想像中的高。 美國密西西比大學的研究人員做了一個關於 Apple Watch 的研究，分析了 56 數據得出一個整合分析，並以 Apple Watch 每一項的表現都與標準的醫療級工具進行了比較。結果顯示 Apple Watch 於測量心率及步數方面極大部份情況下是準確的。研究人員指，測心率與步數的平均絕對百分比誤差（即衡量準確度的標準指標）分別為 4.43% 與 8.17%，然而估算燃燒了卡路里數據表現就達 27.96%。對於一般大眾買到的穿戴式裝置而言，低於 10% 的誤差值表現已被視為「十分優秀」，但研究團隊測試 Apple Watch 在走路、跑步、混合強度訓練和踩單車等多種活動中計算用戶燃燒了多少卡路里的數據時，卻發現其估算值大幅超出可接受範圍。 不過研究人員同時指出，這個數據本身就相當難以估算，因為涉及許多變數如體重及運動方式等等。因此，不要把每個數字都當作 100% 準確，而是可當成其中一種鼓勵的工具，達至恆常運動、保持追蹤習慣並維持動力。團隊還指出，目前 Apple Watch 的準確度已提高了不少，顯示蘋果在硬體及演算法方面都在逐步改進，而指出弱點可幫助開發者獲得更真實的回應建議，協助他們進一步研究，以製出更好的感應器或演算法，提升智能手錶追蹤健康數據的表現。 更多內容： 9to5mac 消委會試智能手錶運動偵測，Garmin 最貴最高分，一款千元級高評分！Apple、Samsung、華為各有高低 智能手錶推薦 2025 | Apple、三星、Garmin 如何選？三鐵、跑山、單車各有不同，睇清楚點揀！ 緊貼最新科技資訊、網購優惠，追隨 Yahoo Tech 各大社交平台！ 🎉📱 Tech Facebook： 🎉📱 Tech Instagram： 🎉📱 Tech WhatsApp 社群： 🎉📱 Tech WhatsApp 頻道： 🎉📱 Tech Telegram 頻道：
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Apple reportedly ditching its OS naming system for something more... confusing?
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Quick Summary Apple is set to rip up the copybook when it comes to the names of its new OS updates. Industry sources claim the next iOS will be called iOS 26. Apple's other operating systems will follow suit, it is said. If you own an Apple device you'll likely be au fait with the company's OS naming system. We're currently on variants of iOS 18, iPadOS 18, tvOS 18, etc, and iOS 19 and we're fully expecting iOS 19 and its equivalents to be announced during WWDC in a couple of weeks. However, it turns out we could be very wrong. It is claimed that Apple is set to shake-up the naming convention for the software coming to its best iPhones and other devices. And rather than simplify things, it could be more baffling than ever. Bloomberg's resident Apple expert, Mark Gurman, has reported that Apple will switch to yearly identifiers from this year's OS updates. However, much like EA does with its annual EA Sports games, it'll opt for the forthcoming year, not the current one. According to "people with knowledge of the matter", that means we'll get iOS 26, iPadOS 26, macOS 26, watchOS 26, tvOS 26 and visionOS 26 this year, while next year will see iOS 27 release, and so on. The software will be the same as the rumoured iOS 19, etc, but the name will be different. Of course, once we get into the swing of it, it'll make sense. And we get why Apple would want to use the proceeding year rather than current one, considering each OS is likely to release towards the end of 2025 (in September). However, it could make it particularly confusing when scanning through app compatibility, for example. The jump from 19 to 26 leaves quite a gap for the uninitiated. It's also been pointed out just how Samsung this all seems. Samsung has, since 2020, named its flagship Android phones after years – although as they launch in February or March, they use the current date. The Samsung Galaxy S25 family is the latest, therefore. It doesn't do so with its software though, with One UI 8 (based on Android 16) set to be its next big phone OS release. We'll find out more about the new naming structure on 9 June during during Apple's WWDC 25 opening keynote (or should that be 26?).
