[tesin]

That's an editorialized title. Microsoft donates to Republican PACs. Some Republicans are anti-abortion. That doesn't _make_ the donations anti-abortion. The article specifically asks Microsoft and the parties it donates to for more information and clarity so as to distance themselves from the issue, or clarify their position.

The title skips all of that for zero nuance and an outright accusation.

edit: Putting in the title as it stands of this comment before it gets ninja edited "Microsoft’s $3M anti-abortion donations under fire from activists, shareholders"

[politelemon]

Yes I see what you mean, I looked at the original news article that Ars derives from is a bit more objective in its presentation, but seems like Ars is looking for an effigy?

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/08/corporate-donations...

As you said it's more that the orgs that are donating to PACs, need to be aware of what the PACs they're donating to are doing with that money, because the actions are happening after the fact. Interestingly in that same article is that Pfizer and Comcast are the biggest donators since 2018, but that isn't called out either.

It looks like quite a mess as an outsider looking in, sorry to be judgmental, but it feels like PACs are taking advantage of orgs that don't want to face retaliatory action from either party. How can this be in the public's interest?

[tesin]

Oh it's definitely a mess, and I don't absolve Microsoft of responsibility at all. Money, tax breaks, whatever their reasoning is, donating to these PACs looks awful. However I believe we should have a bright line between responsible journalism and opinion pieces that disguise themselves as objective news.

[dang]

Ok, we've put PAC in the title above.