The Fear of Response!
When leaders either lie, distort, or distract, those actions will exasperate those seeking answers as the crisis travels through time.
My friends, the distractions from Lexmark have been eye-opening to how powerful the CCP has become. Our good American friends at Lexmark are now the pawns in what will play out as a chess game between the Chinese Communist Party-controlled PRC entity Ninestar Corporation and The Red, White, and Blue!
June 9th was 48 days ago at this writing.
The print industry has been so comfortable ignoring painful discussions. I am not sure it can muster the energy to engage in them. I am hopeful I am wrong!
Thinking about the last 48 days is reminiscent of so many of my concerns for our industry. The lack of conversation regarding the DHS ban from other than a few folks was alarming.
The legacy media and analysts' lack of substantive coverage is telling. Besides reinforcing CCP, prepared responses from Lexmark, Ninestar, and other subsidiaries of the banned entity Ninestar. What has the industry been presented by these folks?
Recently after numerous attempts on my part!!!! The Business Technology Association finally removed the sponsorship and logo of Ninestar from their website and expelled them from membership. It took over 40 days since the ban for the BTA to do that.
When you read the BTA's message to its members regarding the subject, you have to conclude just how hard it is for our industry to discuss and execute anything painful to the comforts in status quo.
I want to share the opening paragraph and explain why that paragraph reinforces my concern that the industry has a significant weakness in dealing with controversial subjects. Most attempt to make everyone happy and we all know the saying about that.
Here's that opening paragraph; read through it then I will share my thoughts.
The very first sentence is perfectly stated. However, the following sentence conflicts with the first sentence and the sentences after that are entirely irrelevant to the issue it's a distraction.
The UFLPA is based on "Rebuttable Presumption" The guilt is assumed for a good reason. The U.S. Government wants to do everything it can to shut down this outrageous behavior of the CCP. If the CCP wants to open for inspection without notice all its slave manufacturing facilities and prove they are not using slave labor, they are welcome to do so.
The BTA's second sentence is the opposite of the government's intention. So, in reality, the BTA does not fully support the (UFLPA). Instead, the BTA believes that they should modify the law and allow the banned PRC entity's judgment to be based on the by-laws of the BTA!
I am glad the BTA did not have influence to the DHS in crafting the law. If they did, no PRC entity would ever make the banned list because the Chinese Communist Party's ruthlessness in managing and controlling the narrative within their regime is very successful.
For that reason, the DHS set this law up as a "Rebuttable Presumption," A law that is one of the few government actions with bipartisan support.
As a matter of fact, today, the House and Senate feel the law needs to go further. Senator Marco Rubio (Rep) Is pushing legislation to impose secondary sanctions on all those who have monetary gains from any banned entity.
The BTA's response clearly highlights one of our industry's most significant challenges. Too many of our industry's organizations and individuals struggle to discuss or participate in anything upsetting to the comforts of the status quo.
Our industry needs to put more pressure on itself to explore the unimaginable, especially when what was once unimaginable slaps them upside the head.
The BTA planned the event in Boston, and when the BTA published its July magazine, there was no mention of UFLPA or any panel discussion on the topic. The July issue's publishing date was likely after June 9th.
So, what was the catalyst to influence the BTA to add this panel discussion? Why did it take so long for the BTA to respond to my suggestion to remove Ninestar from their website as a sponsor?
Sadly, the BTA, like many others in the industry, is too comfortable to upset current circumstances. Or, participate in something that is contrary to everyone being happy.
Let's now discuss how the example I presented regarding the BTA 's response aligns with my thinking regarding Lexmark.
I believe Lexmark is lying by distorting all the realities regarding their relationship with Ninestar.
Lexmark knows that the industry avoids all conflicts, and many will aid them unconsciously. It's is a condition of being comfortable in complacency.
I recently saw an article announcing that Lexmark received a Cloud print award. WOW! What a distraction!
Lexmark has been out-front in marketing about how great they are all through this crisis, a crisis questioning Lexmark's ties to Slave Labor.
Whenever Lexmark mentions through marketing its cloud platform, I reread the privacy statements on its website and become more concerned as they state clearly that international data laws protect your data within all the countries they do business.
So, Lexmark wants us to believe that the Chinese Communist Party respects international data laws.
Here's the privacy statement right off the Lexmark website under the section Cross-border transfers Focus on the words (All kinds of data-Not, just personal)
Hopefully, one day, more of the industry will be outraged enough to discuss this data story regarding Lexmark. The lack of effort or fear of others to address this is alarming, especially as it's probable that Lexmark will end up on the list of banned entities.
The CCP is probably doubling down during this crisis, getting all the data they can.
Unfortunately, as we are all witnessing, ignoring things doesn't mean they are not valid. Soon we will see the parrot press, as I jokingly call them, get more involved with this issue regarding Lexmark and the UFLPA.
However, remember my friends. They all eagerly reshared the BTA's response; however, no one from the legacy media asked the BTA to respond. And more importantly, all of them were satisfied with how the BTA responded.
Hopefully, this BTA response is a great teaching example. It won't be long before the BTA has to deal with more severe ramifications regarding this, DHS action, and other completely disruptive issues.
I am excited to attend the BTA annual meeting in Boston. I am reserved but hopeful that the panelists will outline and highlight how prepared our industry is for what is to come.
It will also be extremely disturbed if Lexmark refuses to participate. After all they have been insisting they are independently governed by its Americain board.
This panel would be a great opportunity for Lexmark to prove their independence from the PRC who owns them.
The impacts of geopolitics within our industry are going to be tremendous.
Ray Stasieczko, Host of The End Of The Day With Ray!