Catholics vs. Hitler

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
I see no reason why this can't be done with agreements with whoever accepts responsibility to act on the rest of the company's behalf on certain matters. Maybe it's the president or CEO or whatever. The company chooses their representative and he/she can perform those actions. And if in casual conversation we were to simply say "Pepsi is buying Dr. Pepper", that can be forgiven as simply a figure of speech meant to simply life so we don't have to know exactly who is repsonsible for exactly what decisions. If we start getting into nitty gritty details, I don't think it's that unreasonable that we actually look at the individuals who are actually capable of action. This is especially true if we're going to start doing things like judging the morality of a certain action.

[/ QUOTE ]
I can see that you could phrase everything differently and reduce the discussion to individual people. I just dont see the advantage. I have no problem saying coke owns a factory and I have no problem saying they are expanding their market share or advertising or being sued or any other action (some of which are good, some bad). What advantage is there in not adhering to the conventions of everyday language?