Conflict Areas
Blog Series
Announcements
Archive
- February, 2012 (13)
- January, 2012 (53)
- December, 2011 (55)
- November, 2011 (69)
- October, 2011 (51)
Blog Roll
- Africa in Transition
- Africa24 Media
- Across the Aisle
- Burning Billboard
- Change.org - Human Rights
- Chris Blattman's Blog
- Condition Critical
- Congo Siasa
- From the Front Line
- Genocide Intervention Network
- Huffington Post
- ICC Observers
- IJCentral
- Impunity Watch
- In Situ
- Institute for War & Peace Reporting
- Opinio Juris
- Meskel Square
- Mia Farrow
- National Security Network Democracy Arsenal
- Nicholas Kristof, The New York Times
- Promise of Engagement
- Pulitzer Center - Untold Stories
- Resolve Uganda
- Save Darfur
- South Sudan Info
- STAND
- SudanReeves.org
- TakePart
- Think Progress
- UN Dispatch
- Voices from the Field
- Voices on Genocide Prevention
- War Crimes
- WITNESS
- Woodrow Wilson Center
- World is Witness
- Wronging Rights
Books by John Prendergast
Why Nintendo?
The conflict minerals problem is a systemic one in consumer electronics. To date, no companies have actually taken the steps required to verify that their products are conflict-free. Some individual companies and industry associations are doing more than others. Our action last week targeting Intel was nuanced to show appreciation for their efforts to date, but to challenge them to do more by supporting legislation.
Nintendo, on the other hand, has been entirely unresponsive to NGO engagement efforts. They did not reply to letters sent by Enough and our coalition partners. They are not a member of the electronics industry corporate responsibility association that has been working on conflict minerals, or the trade associations that have engaged on U.S. legislation. Instead of engaging with activists, Nintendo has an auto-response email to our concerns:
“On behalf of Nintendo I appreciate the opportunity to respond and thank you for your patience. Nintendo does not purchase any metals as raw materials. As a remote purchaser that buys finished components made from many materials, Nintendo requires its suppliers to comply with its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Procurement Guidelines, which stipulate suppliers comply with applicable laws, have respect for human rights and conduct their business in an appropriate and fair manner.”
This response shirks responsibility for what transpires in Nintendo’s supply chain back to its suppliers. And without verification and enforcement mechanisms, the requirements for suppliers are inadequate and easily vulnerable to falsification.
We decided to focus on Nintendo in today’s email in order to contrast this lack of engagement with other companies who have taken some important steps forward on this issue. During the rest of this week we will adjust our message to different companies based upon their relative performance cleaning up their supply chains and engaging with governments, activists, and NGOs to help solve this problem.
This is an interesting article, however, it is a bit biased against Nintendo and probably does explain the entire situation. Just because Nintendo refused to properly respond to inquiries about the source of the raw materials used in their products does not give you the right to condemn the company. So what if they didn't reply? Big Deal, Nintendo probably has better things to do than to reply to some unknown NGO that probably asked for a huge donation which Nintendo refused to provide and in response to this, Enough bitterly contracted one of their lapdogs to condemn the company(Nintendo). The situation involving the conflict minerals is indeed sad, however, 'Enough!' should not single out Nintendo and have one of its lapdogs write a propaganda piece against the company. Instead of focusing on Nintendo, why not focus on the corporations that are actually behind the procurement of these conflict minerals. And before you start writing about the coltan mineral used in electronics (DVDs, consoles), the writer should have mentioned that only a small fraction of the mineral is found in the Congo and probably not even used in Nintendo's products. Also, their email response was adequate, what were you expecting? The email response was short and to the point, and it certainly does not 'shirk' the responsibility for what transpires in their supply chain. Just because the company failed to respond to your questions the way you wanted does not give you the right to negatively portray the company in an article that suggests that Nintendo may possibly be using conflict minerals in its products. Before anyone starts commenting, I must say that I support many NGOs and I CONDEMN the use and mining of conflict minerals. However, I think that Enough is self righteous to the point that the individuals working there believe that they can do no wrong and that they should be given some preferential treatment, so much so that when a company does not respond to their requests by rolling out the red carpet, they cry murder and let loose their minions to paint that company in a negative light by writing suggestive articles without any evidence. Also, I think the writer of this piece needs to get over himself and find something better to do instead of picking on video game companies.
This is an interesting article, however, it is a bit biased against Nintendo and probably does explain the entire situation. Just because Nintendo refused to properly respond to inquiries about the source of the raw materials used in their products does not give you the right to condemn the company. So what if they didn't reply? Big Deal, Nintendo probably has better things to do than to reply to some unknown NGO that probably asked for a huge donation which Nintendo refused to provide and in response to this, Enough bitterly contracted one of their lapdogs to condemn the company(Nintendo). The situation involving the conflict minerals is indeed sad, however, 'Enough!' should not single out Nintendo and have one of its lapdogs write a propaganda piece against the company. Instead of focusing on Nintendo, why not focus on the corporations that are actually behind the procurement of these conflict minerals. And before you start writing about the coltan mineral used in electronics (DVDs, consoles), the writer should have mentioned that only a small fraction of the mineral is found in the Congo and probably not even used in Nintendo's products. Also, their email response was adequate, what were you expecting? The email response was short and to the point, and it certainly does not 'shirk' the responsibility for what transpires in their supply chain. Just because the company failed to respond to your questions the way you wanted does not give you the write to negatively portray the company in an article that suggests that Nintendo may possibly be using conflict minerals in its products. Before anyone starts commenting, I must say that I support many NGOs and I CONDEMN the use and mining of conflict minerals. However, I think that Enough is self righteous to the point that the individuals working there believe that they can do no wrong and that they should be given some preferential treatment, so much so that when a company does not respond to their requests by rolling out the red carpet, they cry murder and let loose their minions to paint that company in a negative light by writing suggestive articles without any evidence. Also, I think the writer of this piece needs to get over himself and find something better to do instead of picking on video game companies.
That is sad the way they shrug their responsibilities. Level Sensor
Nice topic ! thank you for sharing them ! Nice dresses just as Jovani evening dresses Hot evening dressessuch are very beautiful
Nintendo is the best for me because they have a lot of features.
Puppies of sale in ohio