The nonprofit organization Business for Social Responsibility has published an open letter to “The New York Times” pointing out several inaccuracies and misleading statements in the newspaper’s recent report that suggested Apple has ignored worker problems at its Foxconn manufacturing plant in China, reports “AppleInsider” (

Last week “The Times” printed an article on the “human costs” that go into the making of Apple products such as the iPad — including long hours and dormitory living quarters. The article included quotes from former Apple executives and an anonymous consultant at BSR and alleged that Apple has chosen to simply ignore labor abuses at Foxconn factories.

Apple CEO Tim Cook sent an email to employees ( to employees about the report. Here’s the opening of the email: “As a company and as individuals, we are defined by our values. Unfortunately some people are questioning Apple’s values today, and I’d like to address this with you directly. We care about every worker in our worldwide supply chain. Any accident is deeply troubling, and any issue with working conditions is cause for concern. Any suggestion that we don’t care is patently false and offensive to us. As you know better than anyone, accusations like these are contrary to our values. It’s not who we are. For the many hundreds of you who are based at our suppliers’ manufacturing sites around the world, or spend long stretches working there away from your families, I know you are as outraged by this as I am. For the people who aren’t as close to the supply chain, you have a right to know the facts.”

For more, go to .

“AppleInsider” says that BSR issued its own response to the article on Friday by way of an open letter addressed to editors at “The Times.” The letter praised the Times for shining a light on “important supply chain issues,” but it pointed out that several corrections the organization had sent to the publication after seeing an early version of the report had yet to be made.

BSR President and CEO Aron Cramer said that, “Unfortunately, the article mistakenly attributes several quotes to an unnamed “BSR consultant,” presenting a false impression that those views should be associated with BSR.”