n as a manufacturing site is obvious: ultracheap labor.”(252). Mueckler 3 When consumers and human rights groups along with labor organizations took action in1996, they did get a response from Disney. The National Labor Committee and otherorganizations together made Disney’s involvement in Burma public with the Free Burma Campaign. Disney denied these claims. They pretended they had no involvement in Burma. They knew how the negative public announcement would hurt the company, which is the majorreason why companies hide the facts from the consumers. Schweizer explains that many otherrespectable companies have volunteered to monitor their working conditions, however, Disney isnot one of them. This shows that Disney is aware that the problem of sweatshop exists in theirlicensees operation. Disney may have changed its ways concerning Burma after public protests, but itseems less than interested in tackling the child labor problem. Retailers andmanufacturers have been asked by the U.S. Department of Labor to voluntarilypledge to monitor their contractors to make sure no child labor is being used. Dozens of well- known companies have joined, including Abercrombie and Fitch,Guess, Lands’ End, Lerner New York, Levi Strauss, the Limited, and others. Disney has not (254). However, Disney continues to be a very hypocritical company by continuing to stay active inUNICEF activities. Yet, Disney can continue to entertain millions of children everyday. It is ashame that the children that are working for them do not receive the same benefits. It is quitepossible that they would love to have a short break to enjoy a cute Disney movie.This shows how companies try to rationalize what they know is wrong. Consumers mustknow that they are being deceived by the image they have of the company. The company CEO’scan no longer ignore the situation. Consumers have to let the companies know that they areaware of this situation. ...
