Separator
Why Your Business Shouldn't Be a Soapbox
Default_picture
Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Editor's note: Some things just shouldn't be mixed together, like business and pleasure, or Castlevania and 3D. Gerry makes the case that you shouldn't mix business with politics, either. He uses the recent brouhaha surrounding Stardock CEO Brad Wardell's politically motivated decision to stop using UPS as a case study. What do you think about Wardell's actions? -Brett


For those who aren't aware, Stardock Corporation is a software company that provides enhancement utilities for Windows. They also publish and digitally distribute a number of great PC games, such as Sins of a Solar Empire and Demigod.

I'm a huge fan of Stardock and the way they execute the corporate ideals of their CEO, Brad Wardell -- ideals which include providing polished products that aren't laden with DRM and offering top-notch service that treats their customers like people rather than just consumers. Many of their values coincide with those we have at the company I co-own.

Unfortunately, Wardell recently made a mistake that typically only rookie executives fall for: combining your business with your personal politics.

 

Wardell is very conservative in his political beliefs, and, to his credit, he makes no attempt to hide that fact. He maintains a blog where he frequently details them. I've got no qualms with him doing that, and I'm not writing this to debate his beliefs.

What concerns me, however, is when he decided to protest a decidedly political issue with elements of the business he is charged with running. On top of that, he published his intentions and then became agitated when the Internet community called him out for doing the very thing he decried someone else for doing. This is becoming an increasingly large problem with business owners and something that I think needs to be curtailed.

First off, a bit of background: Recent news reports revealed that in protest of the increasing inflammatory rhetoric from host Glenn Beck on Fox News, the major courier company UPS pulled all their advertising from the network and possibly from the entirety of Fox Television. (UPS has since claimed that they were in fact not boycotting Fox and that new ads are already running on Fox networks.)

Wardell did not approve of UPS's actions, stating that he didn't like to see "companies trying to push their ideology on others." Stardock was using UPS as the carrier for products they physically shipped to customers, but the following day, he requested his employees to start shipping with FedEx instead of UPS.

Shortly after doing this, he posted about it on his Facebook page -- a comment which was quickly picked up by the gaming press and inspired a lot of anger. Many loyal customers of Stardock began calling for a boycott, saying that Wardell was endorsing the views of Glenn Beck and Fox News by dropping a company that refused to advertise on the network for supposedly political reasons.

Wardell has since blogged about the issue and the response from the gaming community. He claims his comments and actions were exaggerated. He wasn't trying to make any major political or moral statement, he writes; he was just annoyed and decided to go with another shipper. His response was calm, thought out, and clear on the point that Stardock is his company and choosing another shipper is his prerogative, as it was for UPS to pull their ads from Fox in protest.

That said, I do think he made some very poor errors in judgment, and he seems to be a bit too eager to pass blame for this on to others.

Wardell's company operates almost entirely off online commerce. He must be very familiar with how Internet communities work and how they tend to react to things. It was a gross oversight on his part to think that his actions wouldn't be discovered and that the reaction wouldn't be significant, particularly since he published his reason for switching companies.

He claims that his comments were published to a Facebook account he tries to keep private. But two sentences later, he talks about how he has roughly 350 Facebook friends. That's an awfully large number of people to trust with a controversial subject. Anyone who is Internet savvy knows that privacy ultimately doesn't exist online.

Wardell also wrote, "I would be the first to agree with the people who said 'it’s not good business to publicize such things.' Except I didn’t." I'm sorry, sir, but yes, you did. If you write something online, there is a very good chance it will be seen by plenty of people -- and some of those people will strongly disagree with you.

If what you're posting is something you aren't comfortable with the world knowing, then don't post it. Decrying the media for doing their job is disingenuous, in my opinion.

All of these are merely secondary symptoms of the one core issue that Wardell unfortunately tripped over: Never mix your personal politics with your business. He was actively engaging in the very same thing he decried UPS for doing, an irony I'm not convinced that he fully appreciates.

In his blog post, he claims that one shouldn't mix business and politics, when that is precisely what he did -- without apologies. I have no formal business training, yet the necessity of keeping that separation is something I have known from the very beginning. I don't preach politically on my company's corporate blog or to our customers.

If Stardock was a public company, Wardell would likely be answering some very tough questions from its board of directors right now. Speaking for yourself is one thing, but speaking through the mouthpiece of your business -- whether with words or actions -- reflects on your operating practices, your brand image, and your staff. It is unfair to paint those who work for you with the brush of your own beliefs. I doubt Stardock will suffer much economically from this controversy, but any drop in business affects everyone there, not just the few at the top.

I still think Stardock embodies corporate values that are sorely lacking in today's world, and this flap will not deter me from doing business with them in the future. However, I would like to urge Wardell and any other fellow business owners who might read this to really consider the value of keeping your personal views on politics or whatever else just that -- personal.

It's good to have your own ideals and fight for the world you want to see. More of us need to do that. But your business involves more than just yourself, and it is critical to make sure it doesn't end up adopting your personal political views. Preaching politics is a surefire way to lose customers.

 
0
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (17)
Jayhenningsen
September 30, 2009
I think it's just not good for business when you use your company to promote anything that has the potential to alienate specific groups of people. For the same reason, small businesses that paste religious symbols all over their ads and vehicles drive me crazy. No, it doesn't make me more likely to trust your company, and yes, it does have the potential to drive away members of other religions.
Lance_darnell
October 01, 2009
A wise person once said "never talk about religion or politics, for you never know who you will offend."
Default_picture
October 19, 2009
Now, I don't agree (at all) with Wardell's politics, but to pretend that politics can be taken out of anything is absurd. Everything is politics. Every dollar you spend is a vote, every business decision is a political decision.

What got Wardell in trouble is he let a rigid ideology get in the way of business, and worse he made the stupid mistake of assuming everyone thinks like he does.

His mistake wasn't talking about politics, it was supporting someone who's seen as a ignorant racist moron by a significant amount of people.
Default_picture
October 19, 2009
The whole thing reminds me of the 'Dixie Chicks' and their loss of popularity after criticizing Bush. Openly bringing politics into your public image is always going to alienate people. For some, like Glenn Beck, this is a good thing. For those whose appeal crosses party lines, like a video game publisher, it's a very bad thing.
Franksmall
October 19, 2009
Well, Stardock lost my business way before this even, when they tried to say that Gamestop (whom I was working for at the time) breaking the street date on Demigod was the reason for the game's craptacular launch.

He then tried to make it seem like Gamestop had made him and his workers have to work over a holiday, when it was their fault for not having the game up and ready and not clearly communicating the street date to Gamestop.

Gamestop is a huge stickler for street dates while other companies like Wal-Mart end up breaking almost every street date possible.

It was not just the bad launch of the game, but Wardell's refusal to admit even the least bit of responsibility for the events, that made me decide that I would not buy their games anymore.

That is too bad too, because Sins of a Solar Empire is one of my favorite strategy games.
Default_picture
October 19, 2009
I think Glenn Beck *is* ignorant, and a moron, but I guess he just automatically gets the "racist" tag because he is conservative, eh? Granted, I have not listened to him all that much, but I have never heard him say anything racist.

The Dixie Chicks backlash was not becasue of their opinion, it was because that opinion was thrown out on foreign soil in an effort to cozy up to that crowd by badmouthing her president. Some things are just bad form.

But what Joseph said was correct- every dollar spent these days is a vote for something or someone somewhere. I wonder if Gerry's opinion extends to corporate or union contributions to political parties, lobbyists, PACs, and the like.

Have Fun!
Default_picture
October 19, 2009
So let me get this straight. Game journalists and company representatives can bash Republicans and Sarah Palin all they want, in news articles, blog posts, and podcasts (I'm looking at you, Garnett Lee and Jason Ocampo). Nobody takes issue with them bringing politics into their public discussions. But when a Conservative makes a decision based on politics, the Internet lights up and the journalists string him up. And that is fair how?
Default_picture
October 19, 2009
^^^ Oops, I meant Garnett Lee and Jeff Green. I don't know why I put Jason Ocampo in there.
Default_picture
October 19, 2009
@Jake- Don't know who told you public opinion was fair. They were wrong.
Audience is important. The Dixie Chicks lost popularity for comments regarding Bush (good form or not). Green Day made far more inflammatory comments regarding the previous administration and didn't see any knee-jerk decline.
Default_picture
October 19, 2009
@Travis - You are completely correct, audience is important. Come to think of it, I never thought about it in that way. Thanks :)
Default_picture
October 19, 2009
This was an interesting exercise in hypocrisy on the author's part. How about you leave politics out of it, too, and we can all get on with our lives?

Bitmob, don't become Joystiq. I come here for games coverage, not slapdash politics. Yeah, I know the staff didn't write the article, but you decided to post it on the front page. Show some better judgment next time. ;)
Robsavillo
October 19, 2009
I don't think the problem was mixing politics with business -- the problem was with Wardell being hypocritical in his actions.

Plenty of businesses actually do very well by mixing in their personal politics, and it happens all the time. Even Stardock has been mixing in personal politics even before this flap.

The developer's position on copyright is ultimately political, and is one that has defined the developer and separated it from its peers. It's also a position that has likely garnered them considerable support.
Default_picture
October 19, 2009
I don't think there are too many things you can do nowadays that can't be skewed politically, if someone's looking to do so.

Mario is pro-drugs because he's always clamoring for magic mushrooms. Scribblenauts is blasphemy, because you kill God (so can Vampires apparently). Metal Gear is anti-Republican because it's anti-war.

I think the difference is how you deliver your message. It's true, you can try to make a neutral, as politically correct project as possible, but you're bound to either make something offensively banal and/or forgettable.

I think Bioshock is one of the most overrated games of all time, but it's message regarding the consequences of unbridled objectivism can easy be seen as at attack on that very specific ideology. Outside of presentation, I think it was the best part of the game, yet I don't recall anyone protesting or boycotting.

I also can't help but think the messages 'Dead Rising' tries to convey would never get play in a big-budget Hollywood-style film, because no studio has the guts to get behind something so anti-consumption.

Chances are, your story will be better if it has at least some slant, some skewed view to it, even if it pisses off some people. But it's important to be responsible, and reasonable in your argument.

I think Mr. Wardell's mistake was making it a very personal attempt to send a message in favor a figure(s) (Glenn Beck and Fox News) who for all intents and purposes have virtually no redeemable values (except maybe on rare occasion, Shepard Smith), and blatantly ignore fact and logic to promote their own warped agendas.

And I don't think gamers in particular have forgotten this Fox News fiasco: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKzF173GqTU

On the flipside, if it was discovered UPS was actively participating is some sort of heinous abuses, Mr. Wardell would probably have been well-served to drop them like a hot rock, rather than to continue supporting them.

In the end, maybe it's really more a judgment issue.
Default_picture
October 19, 2009
Er, "Scribblenauts is blasphemy, because you CAN kill God (so can Vampires apparently)."

Sorry, 'CAN' should be in there. The game doesn't make you kill God, lest someone freak out...
Brett_new_profile
October 19, 2009
@Kris: Why do you think Gerry is being hypocritical? I see this post as an opinion piece from the perspective of a businessman.
Default_picture
October 19, 2009
@Jake

Even conservatives would hate Glen Beck. Everyone hates him. It is one thing to be conservative in your political views, it is another to subscribe to his lunacy.
Default_picture
October 19, 2009
Someone said early, maybe it was Garnett Lee, that there's no such thing as unbiased opinions, but when we state out our personal bias we can let our audience identify or not identify with us, so here's a little extra context to the situation.

Stardock's anti-DRM stance is a political satement, one which gains much goodwill from us, gamers. And Stardock is also giving UPS a perceived "sanction" for making an apparent political statement by pulling their advertising on Fox, that can be named a political statement on its own, so what's the problem? Fox News has been repeatedly blaming videogames for the degradation of society and convincing their audiences of the "causal link" between violent video games and violent behavior, and also clamoring for stronger control on the sale of videogames, generating controversy (badwill?) to us, gamers.

Sooo, our very own point of view (even by identifying us a group) is making the judgement here: Stardock's political statement is fine when we like it, and innapropiate if it doesn't. Maybe Mr Wardell is someone who thinks gamers are not criminals AND also shares opinions with the editorial line of Fox News, is he hypocritical? one must be of one or another? who drew the line here?
You must log in to post a comment. Please register or Connect with Facebook if you do not have an account yet.