The effect of his letter was intimidation of VLW's sources of information in Vietnam, making it virtually impossible now for VLW to monitor what is happening in Nike shoe factories there. Ha, noted for his caution, must have been shocked to find his own words suddenly so public. The uproar following the letter's publication was an embarrassment for both Ha and Nike. However, the letter is consistent with how many believe Nike operates privately in its dealings with authoritarian governments. However, Reebok has now taken the first step toward acting more responsibly in such countries.
Workers have the rights to freedom of speech and assembly.
Dita Sari has been particularly effective at raising issues on behalf of factory workers, and her voice deserves to be heard. Nike would do well to match Reebok in calling publicly for the release of Dita Sari. Most of the changes coming from Nike and Reebok headquarters apply to shoe factories. In November 1998 the National Labor Committee brought public attention to the case of Julia Esmeralda Pleites, who had worked in a sweatshop in El Salvador producing clothing for Nike and other companies. Although Nike is quick to assert that much of its clothing is manufactured in the United States, critics point out that domestic garment production, too, often happens in sweatshops.