When agreeing to sponsor Vancouver’s 2010 Winter Olympics, Acer, a manufacturer of laptop and netbook computers,would have been aware of well publicized complaints against the City of Vancouver of human rights abuses targeting computer users and bloggers. Acer has therefore been asked to pull out as a sponsor.  The request was made to Acer’s public relations representives Stella Chou and Henry Chang in their “Branding Divisionâ€, and to Andrew Chang in the Shareholders Division, by an advocate for member #1806 of the City’s Carnegie Community Center in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside. Carnegie Center is just a few blocks east of the 2010 Olympics media center, a Center where there is documented evidence that the City is persecuting bloggers and users of public computers.
By entering into a sponsorship agreement essentially endorsing the City of Vancouver and it’s Olympic Organizing Committee [VANOC], says member #1806, Acer is contradicting it’s advertising claims: “Empowering People….Our long-term mission is Breaking the barriers between people and technology….†Under two successive City managers — Judy Rogers who was both City Manager and the City’s representative on VANOC, and Penny Ballem who is the current City manager and VANOC representative — the City of Vancouver has been accused of “maliciously†creating barriers between residents of the low income Downtown Eastside and technology.
An internet search by Acer staff would have revealed the City of Vancouver’s record of orchestrating a ‘witch hunt’ for bloggers.In late 2006, City management began interrogating Downtown Eastside residents using services at the City’s Carnegie Community Center, Canada’s most used community center sometimes called the “livingroom†of the Downtown Eastside, encouraging them to turn in bloggers. One volunteer at the Center says he was interrogated by City management and encouraged to turn in a longtime friend and neighbor, but he told them she wasn’t a blogger.
An internet search would have revealed that the City knowingly subsidizes the Carnegie Newsletter which has earned a reputation for whipping up hostility toward a suspected blogger, calling him: “blog bozoâ€, “pestâ€, “slimyâ€, “a four year old spoiled brat pissing his pantsâ€, “neighborhood snitchâ€, a “dismal excuseâ€, a “blankâ€, a perpetrator of “fraudâ€. (Eventually the newsletter editor printed a retraction of the fraud accusation, admitting libel.)
An internet search would also have revealed that being suspected of blogging or being linked to a blog is considered grounds by the City of Vancouver to ban a citizen from City premises and public library computers, even if that citizen, as in the case of homeless William “Bill†Simpson, is an elected official.  (Vancouver lawyer Gregory Bruce sent the City a letter warning that their actions toward Simpson were “contrary to the rule of lawâ€.) See Mainstream Media Picks Up Banned Blogger Story.
An internet search would have also revealed that the City of Vancouver not only takes retaliatory action against bloggers but against Downtown Eastside residents engaging in other forms of free speech, regularly banning such individuals from Vancouver Public Library computers as punishment. The City denies Downtown Eastside residents a fair hearing before they are “sentenced†to be banned from accessing computers.  It is not uncommon for a resident to be convicted and sentenced without ever being given an opportunity to defend themselves.  The right to appeal such a sentence is rarely recognized.  And there is documented evidence to support allegations that City management has fraudulently manufactured evidence and witnesses in some such cases.
Most Downtown Eastside residents banned from computer access or targeted during the witch hunt for bloggers have limited education and money and have not pursued their complaints against the City of Vancouver beyond the initial stages. Just one victim of these abuses, member #1806 of the City-operated Carnegie Community Center, continues to seek redress. She has been banned from public library computers situated throughout the Carnegie Centre branch on multiple occasions during the past decade. Years ago, she was banned from the computers after she complained about the supervisor of the sign-in sheet repeatedly pestering her to go home with him to watch pornography, etc. Last summer, she was again banned from computers for daring to talk back to the same man, and found the earlier case in which she had complained of sexual harassment being dug up to be used against her.
Exasperated, member #1806 attempted to free herself from reliance on the City of Vancouver computers by saving $430 and purchasing an Acer netbook in February 2009. She then needed to rely on Carnegie Center and the Vancouver Public Library/Carnegie branch only for WiFi access. Yet she continued to experience harassment, apparently because she had dared give an interview to a blogger about previously being banned from Vancouver Public Library computers. The harassment escalated to a point in June 2009 where she has ceased going to Carnegie Center.Member #1806 Â says she would never have purchased an Acer netbook if she had known that Acer was glossing over such harassment and entering into a sponsorship agreement with the City of Vancouver.
When people in internet cafes ask her what she thinks of her Acer netbook, she explains that she likes it’s light weight and carries it everywhere, but that the mouse pad began to malfunction after a few months, the space bar and forward arrow key developed glitches that come and go, and some of the letter keys are beginning to stick. She also makes a point of asking that they postpone purchasing an Acer until the human rights complaints being concealed behind their sponsorship agreement with the City of Vancouver are resolved. Her friend had an Acer but when it got stolen, he listened to her and purchased an “Eee†netbook instead, which he is happy with.
Penny Ballem is aware of the case of member #1806 and of concerns that Acer is profiting from a sponsorship relationship with the Vancouver Organizing Committee while the City of Vancouver has taken no action to curb harassment of computer users. But Ballem did not respond to my request last week for comment as this post was being written for BNN.
The only peep out of Ballem on this case was in a June 6, 2009 email to an advocate for member #1806, in which she stated that she had been thoroughly briefed on the case of member #1086 and that the two should now meet.  â€I think the best way for me to address this is to offer to meet with member #1086 to review the issues and any appropriate next steps,†Ballem wrote.  Member #1086 has since made three attempts to set up a meeting with Ballem, repeatedly leaving her name, telephone number, and email address with Ballem’s secretary.  Ballem has ignored her.  Member #1086 is not at all surprised.  She was subjected to similar stalling by the previous City manager Judy Rogers. (See article “Alleged Human Rights Abuser on Vancouver’s 2010 Winter Olympics Committee”.) She is also not surprised that Ballem’s briefing on the case was by a City staff person against whom there is documented evidence of lying in this case. Judy Rogers was similarly selective in who she spoke to.  Member #1806 has this take on it: “All they care about is damage control.â€
Acer claims on it’s website to advance the “core values†of being “ethical and caring†and to be committed to “Meeting global standards on human rights….† Says member #1806, “Nows the time to prove it.â€
1 user commented in " Acer Accused of Betraying Bloggers by Sponsoring Vancouver Olympics despite ‘Witch Hunt’ for Bloggers "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackACER HELPS CUSTOMER WITH WARRANTY PROBLEM
Since writing this post, people have been telling me about their experiences with Acer.
A woman in Vancouver told me recently that she liked the light weight of her Acer Aspire and carried it with her constantly, but was getting the run around trying to get it fixed under the one year warranty.
In Dec. 2009, with almost two months left under the warranty, she told Gary at Anitec Computers on Kingsway in Vancouver that the Acer she had bought there had died. When she bought her Acer, she had been told by the Anitec salesman that if there was ever any problem with it, she could take it to Richmond (a suburb of Vancouver) to get it repaired under the warranty. When her Acer stopped working and she asked for the Richmond address, Anitec told her that Richmond is only for minor problems, that her computer would have to be sent to Ontario and that she would have to pay $35 for Anitec to process the forms and send it out…or she could do it herself. “I wish they’d told me that when they were selling it to me”, she said.
As a “courtesy”, Gary at Anitec contacted the Acer repair place in Ontario for her for free and was told that her warranty had expired. Gary said Acer was going by the manufacturer’s date. He checked the invoice; her warranty had not expired. After delays, Gary said he had straightened everything out with Acer and all she had to do was send the Acer to Ontario. He sent her an email to this effect dated Feb. 9, 2010.
When she later emailed Gary to ask him for the Ontario address, he didn’t give her one but instead emailed her with instructions to call Acer first and get a repair request#. He gave her a 1-408-432-6200 number which she called twice, but a recording said it had been disconnected (although it had at one time been an Acer #, a fact she verified on the internet.) She found a 1-800 # on the Acer.ca website and called that and was given another telephone number which she called and an automated female voice instructed her to type her netbook serial number into her telephone; when she did, the computerized voice politely told her the warranty had expired and hung up. “I was screaming at the walls,” she says.
She called Gary at Anitec and told him that it had been her understanding that he had established contact with Acer in Ontario and her warranty claim had been enacted. He said he had established contact but that she had been required to do the work of activating the warranty before Feb. 20, which had now passed. That was news to her.
Gary was of the opinion that if she contacted Acer and told them that he had been in contact with them well before her warranty expired, they might still respect the warranty.
She found an email address on the Acer.ca website where people can ask questions. She emailed Acer and they responded by informing her that her warranty had expired and asked her a few key questions about what was wrong with the net book. Due to the nature of the email responses, she got the impression that she was communicating with a machine that was simply picking up key words and giving stock answers. But there may have been actual human beings at the other end as well, since each email had a different person’s name at the top of it. Judging from the names, it is possible that the email address was outside North America.
She was informed that ‘failure to boot’ was the problem with her net book and that she could have it repaired for $199. She was also told that if this was not a satisfactory resolution to her case, she could have the decision reviewed. But she saw no email address to use for this appeal. So she used the same email address and told her entire story. Acer then gave her a Service Repair number and told her to send her Acer to 7676 Winston St. in Burnaby, BC (a suburb of Vancouver) for repair.
She took the Skytrain and then a bus to get out to that Burnaby address. The name on the door at 7676 Winston was “Big Tech Inc.”, and under the name was a list of computers they repair: Acer, Gateway, etc. A thirty-something Asian man took her net book. “He was friendly,” she said, “He told me I didn’t have to pick it up; they send it back free of charge.”
When she got home, she found an automated email from Big Tech confirming that her Acer netbook with Service Repair number s 1-65AWH7 had been received for repair. The next day, she got another automated email from Big Tech announcing that her Acer was on it’s way back to her by courier.
When FedEx delivered the Acer to her home, she was delighted to find it had been repaired. Inside the box was a letter notifying her that the keyboard had been replaced as well as the Main board. She was also informed in the letter that as a result of the repairs, the warranty had been extended by three more months.
Leave A Reply