Corporate Social Responsibility

Subterms

    Latest story

    100 Shares51 Views

    Glenn Youngkin, an Anti-D.E.I. Governor, Once Championed Diversity

    by

    Not long before he became Virginia’s governor, Mr. Youngkin helped lead, and spoke approvingly of, efforts to improve racial and gender diversity at his private equity firm.Before Glenn Youngkin was a culture warrior who cheered the demise of diversity, equity and inclusion programs, he was a financial executive who worried about a lack of diversity in his field.“One of the clear challenges in the financial sector broadly is both race and gender diversity,” Mr. Youngkin said in a 2018 interview with Bloomberg Markets, soon after becoming a co-chief executive at the Carlyle Group, a private equity firm.His company, he noted approvingly, had worked for years to address disparities in representation.“The second we stepped into this role, we emphasized that this approach was not only going to continue,” he added, “but it was going to be one of our key priorities.”Seven years later, Mr. Youngkin is the Republican governor of Virginia, an ambitious conservative who harnessed concerns about classroom instruction on race into political power, and who has energetically embraced President Trump’s hostility to D.E.I. initiatives.“D.E.I. is dead in Virginia,” he declared recently.In tone and emphasis, his transformation has been striking, and more drastic than commonly understood, according to interviews with half a dozen people who worked with Mr. Youngkin during his time leading Carlyle, as well as a review of company statements, official filings and other documentation from that time.But in many ways, the evolution of Mr. Youngkin — who some Republicans hope will run for president — reflects the ever more chameleonic nature of his party at the dawn of a second Trump era.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 113 Shares125 Views

      in Elections

      Pension Funds Push Forward on Climate Goals Despite Backlash

      by

      At a time of resistance to environmental, social and governance goals, pension funds have become a bulwark against efforts to sideline climate risks.In the past few months, some of the largest banks and asset managers in the United States have quit net zero networks, the climate groups that encourage their members to set ambitious carbon reduction targets and collaborate internationally on sustainability efforts.But the week after Donald J. Trump won re-election in November, NYCERS, a pension fund for New York City employees, went in the opposite direction. It joined a United Nations-affiliated climate action group for long-term investors, the Net Zero Asset Owner Alliance.The timing wasn’t intentional, said Brad Lander, the comptroller who oversees the city’s finances, including the pension fund, and is now running for mayor. But, he added, “we were pleased that the timing sent an important signal.”“It is far more important than it was for pension funds and other big asset owners to take collective action at this moment,” Mr. Lander said.At a time of growing backlash to environmental, social and governance goals and investment strategies, pension funds, particularly in blue states and Europe, have emerged as a bulwark against efforts to sideline climate-related risks.The funds, which sit at the top of the investment chain, have stepped up engagement with asset managers and companies on climate goals and have kept public commitments to use their fiscal might to reduce carbon emissions. In some cases, that has meant shifting to European asset managers, which have not backed off on climate commitments as much as their American counterparts have.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Patagonia C.E.O.: Corporate Responsibility Still Matters

      by

      Companies continue to invest in sustainability, though many are no longer broadcasting it.This personal reflection is part of a series called Turning Points, in which writers explore what critical moments from this year might mean for the year ahead. You can read more by visiting the Turning Points series page.Turning Point: Some of the world’s largest financial firms pulled out of a group committed to fighting climate change.It’s been a tough year for companies wanting to do the right thing. In addition to managing a turbulent global economy, brands have faced backlash from a handful of activists on everything from climate and diversity commitments to supporting Pride events and even encouraging people to vote. More than 100 laws against environmental, social and governance principles have been introduced in Congress and state legislatures since 2023, and right-wing politicians and activists continue to force companies that value corporate responsibility into a culture war by smearing them as “woke.”When a few companies got skittish and pulled back on their diversity or climate efforts, headlines crowed about the demise of corporate responsibility as a whole.This is what happens when sound bites and taglines replace the real work needed to make progress. It seems impossible to find a product now that doesn’t claim to be “green” or “sustainable” or made responsibly. Although some businesses are putting in the time and work to back up those claims, others are confronting the reality that their investors and customers are paying close attention, and the bill to produce results is past due.As I look back on 2024, I think the backlash against corporate responsibility — and sustainability in particular — has been overstated. But while some companies are talking less about their commitments, I’m heartened that many are still quietly setting ambitious targets to reduce emissions, care for their employees and create inclusive communities. They’re doing the work to get there, and they’re pressing ahead in the face of disgruntled pundits and social media trolls.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      Cómo gestiona Bluesky, la alternativa a X y Facebook, su crecimiento explosivo

      by

      En febrero de 2023, media decena de expertos en tecnología presentaron un prototipo de red social a la que solo se podía acceder por invitación. Estrenaron deliberadamente su creación, Bluesky, con poca fanfarria para poder gestionar de cerca su crecimiento.Pero últimamente ha sido todo menos lento.En la última semana, el crecimiento de Bluesky ha estallado, duplicándose con creces hasta superar los 15 millones de usuarios, ya que la gente busca alternativas a X, Facebook y Threads. Se ha disparado hasta los primeros puestos de las tiendas de aplicaciones de Apple y Google como la aplicación gratuita más descargada. Su ascenso ha sido tan rápido que la empresa se ha visto obligada a crecer prácticamente de la noche a la mañana.Los 20 empleados a tiempo completo de Bluesky han estado trabajando sin descanso para hacer frente a los problemas que conlleva el hipercrecimiento: caídas del sitio, fallas en el código y problemas de moderación de contenidos. Y lo que es más importante, han intentado contentar a los primeros usuarios a medida que llegaban nuevos miembros.“Como equipo, estamos orgullosos de nuestra capacidad para crecer rápidamente”, dijo en una entrevista Jay Graber, de 33 años, directora ejecutiva de Bluesky. “Pero siempre hay algunas dificultades mientras creces”. Añadió que la aplicación —que sigue siendo eclipsada por Facebook, Instagram y X— estaba sumando más de un millón de nuevos usuarios al día.Bluesky está surgiendo en medio de la agitación en el mundo de las redes sociales. Después de que Elon Musk comprara Twitter en 2022, lo transformó en X, cambiando muchas de sus funciones y alejando a algunos de sus usuarios más fieles. Threads, una aplicación similar a X que Meta introdujo el año pasado, se basa principalmente en una opaca selección algorítmica que reduce la política de los contenidos que ve la gente. Esto ha provocado que algunas personas se dirijan a otras redes, como Bluesky, para debatir cuestiones sociales candentes.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      For Executives, ‘Defending Democracy’ Can Seem Risky

      by

      Even seemingly anodyne sentiments supporting fair elections have become politically charged.Republicans have spent months laying the groundwork to challenge a defeat of Donald Trump in the presidential election. During a fund-raising call organized by corporate lawyers in September, Douglas Emhoff, the husband of Vice President Kamala Harris, asked for help if those efforts veer outside legal grounds.According to two people on the call, Emhoff asked the lawyers to reiterate to their corporate clients the risks posed by efforts to undermine the integrity of the election.The request underlines the pressure some executives are feeling to repeat public calls they made four year ago, urging politicians to respect the results of the 2020 presidential election. But making those kinds of public statements may have gotten more complicated. Executives, who were outspoken during the pandemic, have resumed their efforts to stay out of politics. And seemingly anodyne sentiments are now politically charged: Only one of two candidates has refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power. That candidate has support of roughly half the country. And he has made it clear that if he takes power, he’s willing to go after his enemies.Democracy, as a term, “has become kind of loaded” for executives, Charles Elson, the founding director of the John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance, told DealBook.“I think that’s why you haven’t heard anything from them. But you got two weeks to go.”The landscape has changed. The Blackstone C.E.O. Stephen Schwarzman and the hedge fund boss Nelson Peltz, two billionaires who condemned Trump after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, have since offered him their support. And one of his most high-profile supporters, Tesla C.E.O. Elon Musk, has questioned the accuracy of elections themselves: “When you have mail-in ballots and no proof of citizenship, it’s almost impossible to prove cheating,” Musk said at a rally in Pennsylvania this week.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Telegram Founder Pavel Durov Defends App in First Comments Since Arrest

      by

      Pavel Durov, held in France since last month, blamed “growing pains” for the company’s problems and pledged to make improvements.Pavel Durov, the founder of the online communications tool Telegram, said on Thursday that it was a “misguided approach” to hold him personally responsible for the spread of illicit content on the platform.Mr. Durov’s comments, made on his Telegram account, were his first public remarks since he was arrested at an airport outside Paris and charged last month by the French authorities for failing to prevent illegal activity on the app. The crimes on Telegram included the spread of child sexual abuse material, fraud and drug sales, French prosecutors have said.“No innovator will ever build new tools if they know they can be personally held responsible for potential abuse of those tools,” Mr. Durov wrote. He said “growing pains” on Telegram, which has 950 million users, had made it easy for criminals to abuse the platform.“That’s why I made it my personal goal to ensure we significantly improve things in this regard,” he said.Mr. Durov’s case has become a point of contention in the politically charged debate over the limits of free speech on the internet. Telegram is committed to light supervision of what people say or do on the platform. The app has helped people living under authoritarian governments communicate and organize. But it has also become a hothouse for disinformation, extremism and other harmful content.Telegram has long been in the cross hairs of global law enforcement agencies because it has refused to cooperate with the authorities. French prosecutors said Mr. Durov had been arrested in part because of Telegram’s “almost total lack of response” to requests related to criminal investigations.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      The U.S. Investors Caught in the Scrum Over TikTok

      by

      Major U.S. investment firms such as General Atlantic, Susquehanna and Sequoia Capital own stakes in ByteDance, the parent of TikTok. Their investments are increasingly under fire.For years, the U.S. investors who backed ByteDance, the Chinese internet company that owns TikTok, have wrestled with the complexities of owning a piece of a geopolitically fraught social media app.Now it’s gotten even more complicated.A bill to force ByteDance to sell TikTok is winding its way through the Senate after sailing through the House this month. Questions about whether TikTok’s Chinese ties make it a national security threat are mounting. And U.S. investors including General Atlantic, Susquehanna International Group and Sequoia Capital — which collectively poured billions into ByteDance — are facing increased pressure from state and federal lawmakers to answer for their investments in Chinese companies.Last year, a House committee began examining U.S. investments in Chinese companies. The Biden administration has curbed U.S. investments in China. In December, a Missouri pension board voted to divest from some Chinese investments, following political pressure from the state treasurer. And Florida passed legislation this month to require the state’s Board of Administration to sell off its stakes in China-owned companies.All of this comes on top of existing issues with owning a piece of ByteDance. The Beijing-based company has grown into one of the world’s most highly valued start-ups, worth $225 billion, according to CB Insights. That’s a boon, at least on paper, for U.S. investors who put money into ByteDance when it was a smaller company.Yet in reality, these investors have an illiquid investment that is hard to spin into gold. Since ByteDance is privately held, investors cannot simply sell their stakes in it. A confluence of politics and economics means ByteDance is also unlikely to go public soon, which would enable its shares to trade.Even if a sale of TikTok was easy to pull off, the Chinese government appears reluctant to relinquish control of an influential social media company. Beijing moved to stop a deal for TikTok to American buyers a few years ago and recently condemned the congressional bill that mandates ByteDance divest the app.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      S.E.C. to Approve New Climate Rules Far Weaker Than Originally Proposed

      by

      The rules, designed to inform investors of business risks from climate change, were rolled back amid opposition from the G.O.P., fossil fuel producers, farmers and others.The Securities and Exchange Commission is expected on Wednesday to approve new rules detailing if and how public companies should disclose climate risks and how much greenhouse gas emissions they produce, but there are fewer demands on businesses than the original proposal made about two years ago.The rules represent a step toward requiring corporations to inform investors of both their climate emissions, as well as the business risks that they face from floods, rising temperatures and weather disasters. An earlier and more all-encompassing proposal faced outspoken Republican backlash and opposition from a range of companies and industries, including fossil fuel producers.The main difference: Under the original proposal, large companies would have been required to disclose not just planet-warming emissions from their own operations, but also emissions produced along what’s known as a company’s “value chain” — a term that encompasses everything from the parts or services bought from other suppliers, to the way that people who use the products ultimately dispose of them. Pollution created all along this value chain could add up.Now, that requirement is gone.In addition, the biggest companies will have to report the emissions they directly produce, but only if the companies themselves consider the emissions “material,” or of significant importance to their bottom lines, a qualification that leaves corporations leeway. Thousands of smaller businesses are exempt, another big change from the original proposal, which would have required all publicly traded corporations to disclose their direct emissions.Also gone from the final rules is a requirement that companies state the climate expertise of members on their board of directors.But the directive for companies to disclose significant risks related to climate change — for example, risks to waterfront properties owned by a hotel chain from rising sea levels and storm surges — survived.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      A.I. Frenzy Complicates Efforts to Keep Power-Hungry Data Sites Green

      by

      West Texas, from the oil rigs of the Permian Basin to the wind turbines twirling above the High Plains, has long been a magnet for companies seeking fortunes in energy.Now, those arid ranch lands are offering a new moneymaking opportunity: data centers.Lancium, an energy and data center management firm setting up shop in Fort Stockton and Abilene, is one of many companies around the country betting that building data centers close to generating sites will allow them to tap into underused clean power.“It’s a land grab,” said Lancium’s president, Ali Fenn.In the past, companies built data centers close to internet users, to better meet consumer requests, like streaming a show on Netflix or playing a video game hosted in the cloud. But the growth of artificial intelligence requires huge data centers to train the evolving large-language models, making proximity to users less necessary.But as more of these sites start to pop up across the United States, there are new questions on whether they can meet the demand while still operating sustainably. The carbon footprint from the construction of the centers and the racks of expensive computer equipment is substantial in itself, and their power needs have grown considerably.Just a decade ago, data centers drew 10 megawatts of power, but 100 megawatts is common today. The Uptime Institute, an industry advisory group, has identified 10 supersize cloud computing campuses across North America with an average size of 621 megawatts.This growth in electricity demand comes as manufacturing in the United States is the highest in the past half-century, and the power grid is becoming increasingly strained.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More