Fairtalks #2: Bas van Abel on founding a startup to disrupt an entire industry

If you listen more closely to the podcast, you will notice that everybody did this, but nobody talked about it. Fairphone was the first to speak up about this situation and create awareness.

And they have always made clear that the phone is not 100% fair, just a first step towards an ethical phone. The Fairphone 1, produced as a result of this DRC trip, contained two fair minerals and was moderately repairable, and that was all.

6 Likes

On short term, yes. On long term, no, at least that isn’t the goal. In short term, soldiers are murderers. On long term, soldiers [if they win] are liberators.

There is no such thing as an ethical company, or an ethical man. It is impossible to be perfect on all the marks of ethics according to everyone’s ethics. Instead, see it as a spectrum; there is a more ethical company according to today’s standards. An example of such a company, is Fairphone.

1 Like

@gwlnl: You’re not wrong technically, but this is exactly the dilemma.

Because this is how I see our civilisation and society currently going down the drain.
While anti-idealists, how ever different on detail, successfully rally behind very basic common denominators (e.g. law of the jungle instead of decency and ethics, any opportune bullsh*t and manipulation instead of science and Enlightenment, dictatorship instead of democracy, etc.) … idealists tend to fracture themselves into camps fighting each other about why any practical level of good is not good enough for their different theoretical expectations of perfection.

Have fun with your stance. You’re losing with this approach, and that’s not good enough for the sake of humanity and the planet.

When in doubt I’m with the Fairphones of this world, who try to really get stuff done and initiate changes for the better.

1 Like

When in doubt I’m with the Fairphones of this world, who try to really get stuff done and initiate changes for the better.

Better for who? For Fairphone, yes, because they get to run a business and for us, yes, because we get to have cool phones. But, as I said, it is certainly not better for the local population. It is so typical that people in the rich West think they know what “better” is.

And here you are wrong in my opinion (see further down).

Ain’t that just the perfect description of your statement?
Aren’t you telling us and Fairphone, that the bribery is not good for the local population? Doesn’t that mean, that you - as someone from the rich West - do know, what is better for the local population?
How do you know?
And is it even true? What is your reasoning in this case?`

If - by bribery - a company gains access to a market, and that company is

  • paying higher wages,
  • caring about security standards,
  • caring about limited working hours,
  • taking care that their money does not end up with warlords.

Do you still consider the act of bribery against the better for the local population?
If you do so, that’s fine; but I really would like to learn the reasoning.
And please take into consideration, that it’s 250 Euro, not millions of Euro for the purse of a dictator.

1 Like

Try again once you have informed yourself in Fairphone’s many blog articles on what they actually do.

You are unleashing a tirade here about some detail incident, discarding real practical progress for real people as if they don’t exist, because otherwise your argument would look helplessly academic. Which it does to me.

You are helping nobody with this apart from yourself, as you can claim lofty moral high ground against reality. Good for you, but this way reality doesn’t care about you.

2 Likes

It’s very simple. The definition of ethical is “conforming to accepted standards of conduct”. Nowhere in the civilized world is bribery considered to be an acceptable standard of contact. Therefore fairphone is unethical. You guys can justify it anyway you want but the bottom line is… It was wrong. Personally I want nothing more to do with this company. You make your own decision.

[…] The individual tends to think in extremes (i.e., an individual’s actions and motivations are all good or all bad with no middle ground).

There is a middle ground, but you refuse to see it. Perfect is the enemy of good.

1 Like

In that case: what are you doing here on *.fairphone.com?

3 Likes

Nothing more.
Just trolling the community is fine :wink: .

I guess, we (all?) are in agreement, that they did something unethical.
Does this make them an unethical company?
Are you an unethical person, if you did some shoplifting or dodged the faire or was it just an unethical decision?
And what, if you dodged the faire, because your wallet was stolen and you had to take the train to get to your bedfast grandmother, that you are caring for and that had called you for help?

What I consider to be very interesting:

  • You said, that bribery is bad for the local population.

That was questioned and described how Fairphone is acting for the good of the local population. And I still really want to know, how this act of bribery could harm the local population.

  • Unfortunately you dropped that argument and resorted to the statement of Fairphone being unethic.

While I challenge this statement, that is based on one action years ago; I as well am disappointed by that avoided discussion.

Finally:
What phone do you have or will you get yourself, since Fairphone is out of the race for lack of ethics?

To that question:

In my opinion, that is no contradiction.
And we should welcome critical voices and discussions, as they keep us “alert” or awake and they help keeping Fairphone moving forward.
I am just disappointed, that there is no real discussion, just some statement “that’s how it is” without arguments regarding the case at hand.

Saying you want nothing more to do with the company on a community forum basically is akin to “I don’t want to be here, I am not interested in a dialogue.”

But if noone feeling this way is posting this in the community forum, then you might end up in the so called bubble.
In my opinion it takes people like this to open one’s mind for other viewpoints.
And from my perception, @gwlnl was really personally disappointed, since he said he hoped to maybe be working for Fairphone someday. So, where to express that disappointment? The community forum doesn’t seem to be so unlikely a choice.
There just have to be some arguments, which I really miss here besides the call for ethics. Even if it (possibly correct) means to not being interested in dialogue, one could at least present some explanation based on arguments.

3 Likes

Hi @Blaffi,

I found this podcast very very interesting, insightful and informative, thanks to all involved :slight_smile: Athough, I do wonder what impression people get of Bas van Abel if he spends all his time justifying what he does because he’s “a creative” - is that an excuse, or a bit egotistical? Does that imply that other people are not creative, and how does that sound, could it be offensive? Anyway, minor observation.

The volume levels of the speakers were much better equalised than last time, good work. I think that Miguel might still have been a bit echoey, but not significant or distracting. However I agree that the overall volume level (maybe gain is the correct technical term) was low, much lower than other podcasts I listen to. This can often be the case when comparing recordings in the real world vs in-studio recordings, when both occur within the same podcast - the real world interview is often harder to hear. However, I’ve no idea how to fix this as I’ve never tried recording anything like this!

I use the soundcloud RSS feed, it works well. Personally I like having a podcast as I can listen whilst doing other things, but I know this is not convenient for non-native-English speakers.

Suggestions for future podcasts:

  • Maybe ask for questions in advance and have a panel of people from Fairphone provide answers? Like an Ask Me Anything?
  • I’ve recently become much more interested in mass-balancing of materials from an ethical supply chain and how much this would add to the cost of a device. I assume (maybe wrongly) that the additional cost is miniscule, maybe a few €s, so why aren’t other companies just doing this so they can get the Fairtrade logo, etc? Is it because it’s too difficult? To me, it seems straightforward to do this (just buy from one place and sell into the right stock exchange) but what am I missing? Is the problem not cost, nor ease, but volumes - are the volumes of ethically-sourced materials just too low for other companies to do this on a larger scale?
  • And if there’s no good reason why other companies don’t do this, then how about naming and shaming a few! Maybe a topic for a future podcast could be the actual additional cost it would add to a device and then do some estimates for well-known consumer electronics products (e.g. IPhone, Galaxy S, TVs, laptops, tablets, smartwatches and maybe even some more unusual things like the Raspberry Pi or something like that).
  • I think there are still some unanswered technical questions about the FP3, such as exactly which Bluetooth, Wifi, USB and NFC services it supports. Maybe someone could trawl the forum (or get a moderator to help?) to identify all of these unanswered questions then have a podcast about that.

And finally on this question of bribery… we only have Bas’ word that it was actually bribery. In fact, Bas said he got a receipt and it was considered a cost in their accounting, plus he’s actually said publicly he bribed someone and yet he hasn’t been to prison - bribery is a crime for any EU company, wherever the bribe happens in the world. So, was it really a bribe? :wink:

Cheers :slight_smile:

2 Likes

This depends on how complex or interesting (which both may differ from moment to moment) the content is. It is also going to differ per person, regardless of native English speaker or not.

PS: I was glad to find the podcast on Spotify, and subscribed :slight_smile:

1 Like

Hi @madbilly - finally getting around to taking enough time for your extensive feedback. Let me start off by saying how much I appreciate your support and the level of detail you go into! A true goldmine for future improvements :slight_smile:

I’ll go ahead and address your points one by one.

Bas is a true character :grinning: visionary, radically transparent and very outspoken - A side effect of this candor can be, that some may be taken aback by what he has to say, or the way he says it. In this case, I don’t believe he meant to use the word “creative” as an adjective qualifying his genius over other people, but rather his job description so to speak. You could also call it “inventor”, “innovator” or the like. This is not to say, I don’t see your concern here, but when it comes to Bas, there’s not a lot of middle ground :slight_smile: He is, who he is and that’s what you get when you interview him - Which is also quite special, because he shares his thoughts and experiences more freely with the community, allowing a more comprehensive look behind the scenes.

Thanks also for the technical feedback. I’ve read the issue with the gain in another comment and I see, or hear, what you mean. The good thing is, that we now have a baseline to work from: Tweak the mixing and mastering to deal with the rest of the echo in Miquel’s recording, adjust the gain to match other podcasts out there and think about the way we publish them (RSS feeds, spotify, podcast, itunes etc. etc.).

Now we’re getting to the fun stuff! Thanks for your suggestions. I was playing around with different format ideas and one option could be to have shorter ask me anything type podcasts, where we get the expert of a certain field in front of the mic, to address questions from the community on a regular basis. I’ll look into that!

Mass-balancing and the politics of ethical decisionmaking in the supply chains are both fascinating and very complex issues, that we’re developing episodes for in the future. The question for me is, how do we frame this topic, who do we invite/talk to, or maybe this could be combined with an earlier suggestion, where we actuallt take this podcast on the road and join the impact innovation team to travel to, for example, the mines in the DRC.

Personally, I would love to be blunter and call out the general industry and even certain players more, to take responsibility - but this is a real challenge and gets very delicate, very quickly. You see, we want to change the industry from within, by offering a more sustainable alternative, that you - our growing community - can support and in doing so, we are teaming up to prove, that there is a market for ethical consumer electronics. Ideally, we want other manufacturers, suppliers, factories, mining operators etc. to realize that this is the way forward and join our projects. We need to find a balance of telling the inconvenient truth, without alienating the industry, to include more and bigger players in our projects for maximum impact.

Good call with the unanswered questions. I’m starting to work my way through the forum and collecting feedback, concerns and open questions. I wonder if podcasts are the right format though, as I hope to keep them story-driven. Maybe a comprehensive blogpost would be more practical?

When it comes to the topic of bribery, I think it goes back to my first point about Bas and his way of storytelling. It was a deliberate decision on his part to disclose this, to highlight the issues that we have to deal with when trying to change things from within. And it was my deliberate decision not to edit his story and let it be heard. Personally, I don’t think it is necessarily a question about the semantics of what is or isn’t a bribe, rather than a discussion we all need to have on the ethics of (sustainable) change. Zooming out, Bas later says that sustainability is a dirty business and he’s right. The truth is, that especially in sustainability, next to nothing is black or white, good or bad, just or immoral - and that extends to everything Fairphone is trying to achieve. I think we’ve been very open about the fact, that the Fairphone is not a 100% fair phone. Sure, we improve with every model we make, because we develop better relationships with suppliers, gain trust from the industry, demonstrate support from our kickass community and so on, but we are far from there yet. If it was really about the numbers, we could have decided to produce in Europe for example, but that would not solve any of the underlying issues that factory workers in China are facing. The same goes for artisanal small scale mining in the DRC, Uganda and other areas. The part of Fairphone’s mission that resonates most with me is, that we’re in it for the positive impact on the affected areas and people, rather than winning some sort of race to the highest percentage of “green numbers”. This includes working in areas with human rights violations, to build structures for solutions, where there aren’t any yet and encourage collaboration on existing efforts.

At the end of the podcast, Bas contrasts the dilemma with the bribe with another situation, where he was forced to decide between a significant delay in delivery time or upping the hours of factory workers. In that second case, he chose the workers over the immediate satisfaction of (paying) customers. Both instances speak to the type of company he envisioned and we have grown into. Without a doubt, we do not condone bribery in any shape or form! In this case, Bas felt that it was important to acknowledge it and open the public debate about it. And I personally agree. However, I understand that not everybody feels the same way and we welcome open discussion on these topics, which this forum continues to deliver in the greatest ways.

This is my personal take on the matter. I don’t speak for Bas or Fairphone as a whole. I hope that this contributes to the overall discussion and I’m curious to hear your take on it.

Again, all of the participation, support and criticism is not only appreciated but essential to keeping Fairphone sharp, on mission and a company we can all stand behind.

Thanks so much.
Best,
Jan

3 Likes

I wholeheartedly agree @BertG and I want to commend @gwlnl for speaking their mind on the forum. I think I speak for everyone at Fairphone - and hopefully for the general mindset of our community - when I say, that we welcome a plurality of opinions, as well as an open debate.

Personally, I feel like the forum is a safe space to discuss all (personal) opinions that relate to Fairphone, the community, our mission or our efforts - providing they adhere to the guidelines of course :slight_smile: So even if there is complete disagreement on a given issue, having an open discussion around it on here is worth it and very valuable to us as individual members of a bigger community and Fairphone as a company.

I wish all online debate would look like the discussions on here :grinning:
Proud of this community!

1 Like

Hi @Blaffi, Wow what a post! :scream_cat: Well done finding time to write, review, edit, etc that :+1:

I know what you mean about Bas, please don’t think I was shocked by what he said, just a little bemused. I totally agree that I’d rather someone be free to speak their mind and let their personality shine through, “warts and all” - in this case it made a much more entertaining and informative podcast. I’m sure he doesn’t speak that way when he’s trying to impress investors… does he?! :anguished: :laughing:

I like your idea of an in-the-field recording and later edited podcast, but this will be much more work for you, please don’t underestimate how difficult it will be to get good quality recordings.

Regarding “naming and shaming”, I know what you mean, I wasn’t sure if this is something which Fairphone should be doing or not… but somebody should be, if it’s not Fairphone, so maybe Fairphone can work with a high-profile NGO on this. For me, I’d really like to know what it is that prevents more companies doing what Fairphone is doing - is it cost, it is difficulty, is it volumes, or is it something else? And essentially everything can still be brought back to cost, so if Fairphone could quantify the additional cost that they think each additional fair practice they do adds to the cost of the FP3 then that should be useful to NGOs who do want to name and shame other companies. (and I would expect the costs would be much reduced for other companies, as their volumes are much larger).

Good point about the unanswered Qs about the FP3, I think a blog on this would be better than a podcast. However a podcast which went through the technical detail of developing the FP3 would be of interest to me (although maybe not to the majority, I admit, as it’s not really a Fairphone USP… although openness is).

Bribery… I don’t think we need to say more on this, I think it was a good call to keep this in the podcast and you should be commended for doing so :clap:

Cheers :slight_smile:

2 Likes

This topic was automatically closed 182 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.