Jeff Bezos’s Medium Post

Complexifier.PNG

News is swirling about Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos’s long Medium post accusing the National Enquirer of “extortion and blackmail” for pictures of him and a woman other than his wife. Bezos claims that Chairman and CEO David Pecker acts of behalf of President Trump to discredit key people, and he cites an immunity deal between the Enquirer and the justice department for these actions. President Trump has openly criticized Amazon for not paying enough taxes.

A popular story about the piece is how Bezos used the word “complexifier”:

“My ownership of the Washington Post is a complexifier for me. It’s unavoidable that certain powerful people who experience Washington Post news coverage will wrongly conclude I am their enemy.”

A Slate article explores whether it’s a real word, and it is not in standard English. The “investigation” concludes that the word “appears most at home in the canon of self-help business gobbledygook.” As expected, memes, like the one here, are popular.

Bezos’s post is interesting from a business writing and character perspective if nothing more.

Discussion:

  • Analyze Bezos’s post: who are the primary and secondary audiences, and what are his communication objectives? How is it organized? What is the tone?

  • To what extent does Bezos meet his communication objectives?

  • Overall, what’s your view of his approach to address the situation with this post?

  • Which leadership character dimensions does Bezos demonstrate?

Marriott Breach Involved Passports

Passport.jpg

Although fewer people were affected by the Marriott data breach than originally expected, millions of passport numbers have been stolen. Marriott representatives have clarified that the breach happened at Starwood before the acquisition was completed. In its latest statement, Marriott confirmed that the following were stolen:

  • There were approximately 8.6 million unique payment card numbers, all of which were encrypted

  • There were approximately 5.25 million unique unencrypted passport numbers and approximately 20.3 million encrypted passport numbers.

Officials say it’s unlikely that someone could create a fake passport based on only a number. But the breach is worrying because passport numbers provide intelligence agencies with information about where people go, particularly when they cross borders. The U.S. hasn’t charged China with the breach, but experts say tactics are similar to those used in other breaches.

Marriott is offering new passports for guests whose documentation was used for fraudulent purposes.

Marriott image source. Passport image source.

Discussion:

  • Analyze Marriott’s communication so far: the audience, objectives, organization, tone, and so on. What works and what could be improved?

  • Compare the communication to how other companies handled a data breach.

  • Should Marriott offer new passports to all affected guests—not just those whose documentation was used for fraud? Why or why not?

McKinsey PPT Slide Causes Problems

Boeing.PNG

Back in 2006, Boeing hired management consultancy McKinsey to help the company launch its 787 Dreamliner despite rising titanium prices. According to a New York Times article, McKinsey evaluated a proposal for Boeing “to mine titanium in India through a foreign partnership financed by an influential Ukrainian oligarch.”

On a PowerPoint slide, the consultancy suggested that Boeing “respect traditional bureaucratic process including use of bribes.” Included on the slide were names of eight “key Indian officials.” As the article notes, “Nowhere in the slide did McKinsey advise that such a scheme would be illegal or unwise.”

McKinsey admitted authoring the report only after learning that the Times had a copy. Details are fuzzy, and McKinsey isn’t offering more explanation.

Discussion:

  • What’s your view of McKinsey’s responsibility in this situation? Do you believe they encouraged illegal activity, were just doing the job of management consultant firm and considering cultural realities, or something else?

  • The PPT slide seems to have implicated McKinsey. Should the consultants have been more careful about what was documented? Why or why not?

  • What character issues may be at play in this situation?

  • The NYT author wrote, “Nowhere in the slide…” I would say, “Nowhere on the slide…” Which is correct—or are both acceptable?

Facebook's Rules for Managing Political Speech

Emojis.PNG

A New York Times article describes a complex rulebook to help employees decide whether to address political speech on the site. The decision process is daunting, and guidelines include extensive examples of content—text and visuals—that may indicate hate or inspire violence.

The author questions whether Facebook employees are making rational, consistent decisions:

The guidelines for identifying hate speech, a problem that has bedeviled Facebook, run to 200 jargon-filled, head-spinning pages. Moderators must sort a post into one of three “tiers” of severity. They must bear in mind lists like the six “designated dehumanizing comparisons,” among them comparing Jews to rats.

Others say Facebook has too much power because the company controls speech in international political situations. For example, before an election in Pakistan, during a 24-hour media blackout, Facebook may have been the go-to source. Before this time, Facebook distributed 40 pages of “political parties, expected trends, and guidelines” to its employees. But guidelines sometimes contradict each other, and Facebook relies of Google Translate, which may not be accurate or precise enough.

Cover image source.

Discussion:

  • When Facebook faced criticism about sharing information with technology partners, company leaders responded in a blog post. If they were to do something similar in this case, what should they say to rebuild confidence in the site?

  • Although the rules can be a “bit baffling,” as the author says, Facebook is trying to address other criticism about its response to hate and violence on the site. What, if anything, can the company do differently to accept accountability?

Facebook Defends Sharing Information with Partners

Facebook is responding to new criticism about how it shares users’ information. A New York Times report identified a few examples of how Facebook allowed other technology companies to access private information:

Facebook allowed Microsoft’s Bing search engine to see the names of virtually all Facebook users’ friends without consent, the records show, and gave Netflix and Spotify the ability to read Facebook users’ private messages.

The social network permitted Amazon to obtain users’ names and contact information through their friends, and it let Yahoo view streams of friends’ posts as recently as this summer, despite public statements that it had stopped that type of sharing years earlier.

In a blog post, Facebook’s Director of Developer Platforms and Programs, Konstantinos Papamiltiadis, explained the reason for about 150 companies to have such access:

Today, we’re facing questions about whether Facebook gave large tech companies access to people’s information and, if so, why we did this.

To put it simply, this work was about helping people do two things. First, people could access their Facebook accounts or specific Facebook features on devices and platforms built by other companies like Apple, Amazon, Blackberry and Yahoo. These are known as integration partners. Second, people could have more social experiences—like seeing recommendations from their Facebook friends—on other popular apps and websites, like Netflix, The New York Times, Pandora and Spotify.

To be clear: none of these partnerships or features gave companies access to information without people’s permission, nor did they violate our 2012 settlement with the FTC.

The post goes on to explain the value to Facebook users of having their information shared.

Discussion:

  • Read the full blog post. How well does the company defend its practices? Analyze the audience, communication objectives, writing style, and so on.

  • How well does the company accept responsibility for sharing information?

  • What else, if anything, should Facebook do to rebuild its image? The company has faced increased criticism and regulatory interest in the past few months.

Marriott Security Breach

SPG.jpg

Personal information of more than 500,00 guests was stolen from the Starwood reservation system. Exposed data includes payment card information, and critics say the company could have avoided the breach years ago. In 2015, Starwood announced a small breach, which cybersecurity experts say should have inspired the company to do more at the time. Starwood argues it didn’t realize the risk, and Marriott leaders argue that they had not yet acquired Starwood. On Friday, Marriott shares were down 5.6%.

A notice at the top of the Marriott homepage reads, “For more information on the Starwood guest reservation database security incident, please click here.” Although the breach was from a Starwood database, the media is consistently reporting the news as “Marriott.” That link and a press release on the website both go to legal sounding statements, although they do provide FAQs at the bottom.

Lawsuits have already been filed against the company for failing to protect users’ data.

Discussion:

  • Is the company taking adequate responsibility for the breach? Explain your response.

  • How can Marriott respond to this crisis and protect the brand at this point?

  • How can the website information be improved? Consider the primary and second audiences, communication objectives, organization, writing style and so on.

Good News, Bad News About Student Preparation for Work

Figure.PNG

A survey of freshmen and seniors at 500 U.S. colleges shows that students feel positively about their career preparation. The According to the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), 93% of students say what they learned in school is relevant to their future career, and perhaps surprisingly, students with professional majors agree only slightly more than students in arts and sciences programs.

This is good news. But a Chronicle of Higher Education article identifies a disconnect: employers aren’t so confident about graduates’ preparation. Employers want students to immediately apply skills on the job, but faculty may not be teaching specific work-related skills, such as running a meeting or writing memos—two examples from the Chronicle article.

Discussion:

  • Students of business communication certainly know how to write a memo—or more accurately, an email. What other skills should be included in a college curriculum for any major?

  • One argument is that employers are responsible for skills training, while the university teaches critical-thinking skills. What’s your view?

  • What report writing principles does the NSSE follow, and how could it be improved? Particularly analyze the charts and graphs, such as the one shown here.

GM Lays Off 15,000 Employees

Cruze.jpg

General Motors will lay off about 15,000 employees and close five U.S. factories. About 2,250 employees accepted a voluntary buyout, which could include six months of pay. But that number wasn’t enough for GM to reach it goals.

About 8,000 salaried employees, or 15% of the workforce, will leave the company. Engineers and designers are hardest hit, and the company will hire more technology workers to focus on electric and hybrid vehicles. The move reflects shifts in consumer preferences against small cars, such as Cruze compact and Volt, in favor of SUVs and trucks. Gas prices are low, so people want larger, more convenient vehicles.

In a statement, GM outlined its plans for the future, and Chairman and CEO Mary Barra explained the decision:

“The actions we are taking today continue our transformation to be highly agile, resilient and profitable, while giving us the flexibility to invest in the future. We recognize the need to stay in front of changing market conditions and customer preferences to position our company for long-term success.”

President Trump said he spoke with Barra and was “very tough.” He also said he’s “not happy” about the plant closings and is hoping for the company to rebuild in Ohio.

Discussion:

  • Evaluate GM’s statement. What business writing principles are followed, and what could be improved?

  • What else, if anything, should GM do to maintain brand image during the cuts? For example, Barra could agree to media interviews. Should she? Why or why not?

Controversy About Wildfires

Trump tweet.JPG

As wildfires rage in California, let’s look at controversy about the cause. So far, fires have taken 31 lives, and more than 200 people are missing. Governor Jerry Brown requested federal aid.

In a tweet, President Trump blamed California for poor forest management. This drew a harsh response from the California Professional Firefighters association, which called the statement “dangerously wrong.” In a statement, the group defended state actions, firefighters, and victims:

“The president’s message attacking California and threatening to withhold aid to the victims of the cataclysmic fires is Ill-informed, ill-timed and demeaning to those who are suffering as well as the men and women on the front lines.”

Later, the president tweeted a more compassionate message:

More than 4,000 are fighting the Camp and Woolsey Fires in California that have burned over 170,000 acres. Our hearts are with those fighting the fires, the 52,000 who have evacuated, and the families of the 11 who have died. The destruction is catastrophic. God Bless them all.

Discussion:

  • Analyze the California Professional Firefighters statement: audience, objectives, writing style, organization, etc. How well does the group defend its position?

  • How well does the statement illustrate principles of persuasion: logical argument, emotional appeal, and credibility?

  • Which leadership character dimensions does this situation illustrate?

Elementary Teachers Dress as Border Wall

Border Wall.PNG

For Halloween, elementary school teachers in Middleton, Idaho, wore costumes portraying parts of a border wall and depicting stereotypes of Mexicans. Pictures showing them smiling as a group with the slogan, “Make America Great Again,” were posted to a Facebook page.

The teachers dressed up during school hours, and parents alerted the school administrators to the problem. In addition to their complaints, 12 local advocacy organizations wrote a letter to the superintendent, including this statement:

“The intent or misjudgments of the individuals involved does not undo the trauma experienced by students, families and communities. The impact on these students does not stay only with them but has lasting effects beyond the school or classroom. We believe the school and classrooms have now become hostile environments that are not conducive to the education of the students.”

In response, the school district posted a statement on its website:

The events that took place at Heights Elementary School in Middleton on Halloween are disturbing and inappropriate. The teachers involved, as well as school administrative personnel, and the Middleton School District showed extremely poor judgment.

The messages conveyed are the antithesis of the beliefs and values of the Idaho Education Association and its dedicated members throughout the state.

The IEA and the Middleton Education Association stand ready, willing, and able to assist the district in providing diversity and cultural competency training for Middleton School District employees. As troubling as the situation is, it does provide us with an opportunity for education and growth so that people can be made more aware of how hurtful these kinds of insensitive behaviors can be.

Discussion:

  • What’s your view of the teachers’ costumes: harmless fun, insensitive, hurtful, or something else?

  • Assess the district’s statement. Who is the audience and what are the communication objectives? How well does it achieve its purpose.

  • Write a better apology. How can you demonstrate humility and address concerns more specifically? Include consequences: what should the district do as a result?

Do Women Overuse Exclamation Points?

They sure do! But a Wall Street Journal article says women are expected to use more exclamation points, and they face a dilemma:

Male bosses who write in blunt, terse prose aren’t noticed much. Plenty of management research has shown, though, that women bosses tread a thin line. Too few softeners like exclamation points, and they’re viewed as hard and unfeeling; too many, and they lack gravitas.

The authors of a Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication article conclude that the exclamation point isn’t as much a “marker of excitability,” as former research claims, but is more about “friendly interaction.” They also found that 73% of exclamations were made by women and 26% by men.

A Wall Street Journal video shows three female executives talking about their own use of exclamation points. Barbara Corcoran, of Shark Tank fame, says women use the mark partly because they want to please others, while men, particularly senior-level men, “don’t even bother to put a period at the end.”

Advice varies, but for business communication, you might use the mark sparingly. Corcoran says she assumes women who use a lot of exclamation points are insecure and know they are unlikely to get what they ask.

Tweet.JPG

But for friendly communications, one or two are okay. Corcoran also suggests, as does a previous WSJ article, that exclamation marks may be appreciated by people who report to you. This is illustrated in the tweet here.

Image source.

Discussion:

  • How do you use exclamation points?

  • Have you noticed a difference between how men and women use the mark?

  • Will this article change how you use the mark?

Google Admits Sexual Harassment Incidents

It’s been quiet until now, but Google has fired 48 employees for sexual harassment. A New York Times article exposed a number of high-profile departures dating back to 2014, including Andy Rubin, who developed the Android.

Rubin was paid $90 million when the company asked for his resignation, but executives never told the entire truth: that Rubin left because he was accused of sexual misconduct. Instead, then-CEO Larry Page, complimented him: “I want to wish Andy all the best with what’s next,” and “With Android, he created something truly remarkable—with a billion-plus happy users.” Rubin denies the claim and the circumstances of his termination.

In addition to this situation, the Times article cites a number of relationships between senior-level managers and employees. An email from CEO Sundar Pichai and the VP of people operations to staff acknowledges the 48 departures, including 13 “senior managers and above.”

Hi everyone,

Today's story in the New York Times was difficult to read.

We are dead serious about making sure we provide a safe and inclusive workplace. We want to assure you that we review every single complaint about sexual harassment or inappropriate conduct, we investigate and we take action.

In recent years, we've made a number of changes, including taking an increasingly hard line on inappropriate conduct by people in positions of authority: in the last two years, 48 people have been terminated for sexual harassment, including 13 who were senior managers and above. None of these individuals received an exit package.

In 2015, we launched Respect@ and our annual Internal Investigations Report to provide transparency about these types of investigations at Google. Because we know that reporting harassment can be traumatic, we provide confidential channels to share any inappropriate behavior you experience or see. We support and respect those who have spoken out. You can find many ways to do this at go/saysomething. You can make a report anonymously if you wish.

We've also updated our policy to require all VPs and SVPs to disclose any relationship with a co-worker regardless of reporting line or presence of conflict.

We are committed to ensuring that Google is a workplace where you can feel safe to do your best work, and where there are serious consequences for anyone who behaves inappropriately.

Sundar and Eileen

Image source.

Discussion:

  • Should Google have been more transparent about the previous departures? Why or why not?

  • Should the executives say more in the email about the specific departures mentioned in the Times article? Why or why not?

  • Assess the email for audience analysis, objectives, tone, organization, and style. What works well, and what could be improved?

  • Which leadership character dimensions does Pichai demonstrate and fail to demonstrate?

Teacher Recommendation Letters Influence Harvard Decision

Harvard Guidelines.PNG

Details about Harvard’s admissions process are surfacing during the trial about how the university’s “race-conscious” decision policy may adversely affect Asian-Americans. The entire guidebook for admissions decisions in 2014 was entered into evidence.

This week, Harvard revealed that white students typically receive “somewhat stronger” recommendation letters from teachers and guidance counselors than Asian-American students, which affects each group’s “personal rating.” The personal ratings on based on characteristics such as kindness, courage, and leadership. When writing letters, reviewers are asked to assess “consistent testimony of an applicant’s unusual effervescence, charity, maturity, or strength of character.”

Back in 1990, the US Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights criticized Harvard’s practice of using a personal rating and admissions officers’ stereotypical comments of Asian-American students. The same issue seems to be presented here, with comments from teachers and guidance counselors.

Image source.

Discussion:

  • How valuable do you think teacher and guidance counselor letters of recommendation are in the admissions process? How much weight should they carry in the overall decision?

  • By definition, the personal rating includes subjective evaluations. Should universities try to avoid subjectivity in the admissions process? Why or why not?

Senators Send Harsh Letter to Google

US Senate Letter.PNG

The U.S. Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation sent a strongly worded letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai. The senators question what the company has done to protect 500,00 users whose profile information was stolen in 2015. Their anger stems from knowledge of an internal memo, cited in a Wall Street Journal article, discouraging disclosure because of fear of “immediate regulatory interest” and the requirement for Pichai to testify before Congress.

In the letter, the senators compare Google’s response to Facebook’s in light of the Cambridge Analytica breach:

“At the same time that Facebook was learning the important lesson that tech firms must be forthright with the public about privacy issues, Google apparently elected to withhold information about a relevant vulnerability for fear of public scrutiny.”

The senators then list specific information about vulnerabilities for Google to provide by October 30.

Google logo image source.

Discussion:

  • Read the Wall Street Journal article for more background information. Did the senators respond appropriately? Why or why not?

  • What is Google’s accountability in this situation? What is the committee’s accountability?

  • In addition to responding to the senators’ requests, what, if anything, should Google communicate to the public at this point?

  • Google may have been avoiding its own vulnerability.

Crisis at Sloan Kettering

mg-1985.jpg

Memorial Sloan Kettering (MSK) Cancer Center’s chief executive, Craig Thompson, has resigned from two boards, Merck and Charles River Laboratories, following investigations of conflicts of interest. Thompson issued a statement about his decision to resign:

“I have taken feedback from our staff and faculty seriously and intend to lead by example. I believe this is the right decision for Memorial Sloan Kettering and will allow me to redouble my focus on MSK priorities: quality patient care, faculty, scientists and staff.”

Sloan Kettering’s chief medical officer, Jose Baselga, was accused of not reporting millions of dollars he received from pharmaceutical companies for his research articles. Baselga previously resigned from Memorial Sloan Kettering as well as Bristol-Myers Squibb, where he served on the board. As one former patient wrote, failing to disclose payments gives “the appearance of influence is troubling. It highlights ineffective oversight, with the potential to cast a shadow on the center’s other excellent doctors.”

When the story first broke, Memorial Sloan Kettering leadership wrote a letter stating, “MSK and our faculty need to do a better job.”

Thompson photo source.

Discussion:

  • Analyze the MSK letter. Who is the audience, and what are the communication objectives? How do you assess the organization and writing style?

  • Should Thompson also resign his chief executive position at MSK? Why or why not?

  • How well does MSK leadership take responsibility for the problems? How is this an issue of integrity for MSK?


Facebook Breach Announced Today

Millions of Facebook users inadvertently gave hackers access to their accounts, and the company is trying to fix the problem. Hackers found a way in through the “View As” feature, which people use to see how their profile looks to others.

FP spotlight.jpg

The company learned of the issue this week and today held a conference call with reporters. To the extent to which Facebook could manage the story, it’s the perfect day for such a report, when the country is focused on whether lawmakers will support Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court despite allegations of sexual assault.

On the conference call, CEO Mark Zuckerberg stressed that fighting hackers is an ongoing concern:

"This is a really serious security issue. This underscores there are just constant attacks from people who are trying to take over accounts and steal information from our community. This is going to be an ongoing effort." 

Facebook’s VP of product development posted a “Security Update” statement on Facebook’s news site, including this reassurance:

“People’s privacy and security is incredibly important, and we’re sorry this happened. It’s why we’ve taken immediate action to secure these accounts and let users know what happened.”

Cover image source. Spotlight image source.

Discussion:

  • Do you agree that Facebook timed the announcement when a bigger story would likely overshadow the news? Or am I just cynical?

  • Assess the Security Update as a persuasive message. Describe the tone and organizational strategy. How well does the statement achieve its objectives?

  • How well does the company take responsibility for what happened?

Google CEO: No Political Bias

Google CEO Sundar Pichai wrote an email to staff with a clear message: Google does not have a political bias in search results. Pichai is responding to President Trump’s allegations as well as his own employees’ concerns about suppressing conservative news.

In one part of the email, he writes,

Google search.png

“Recent news stories reference an internal email to suggest that we would compromise the integrity of our Search results for a political end. This is absolutely false. We do not bias our products to favor any political agenda. The trust our users place in us is our greatest asset and we must always protect it. If any Googler ever undermines that trust, we will hold them accountable.”

Pichai may also be defending the results of an internal email chain in which employees discussed ideas for including information in search results. Here we see some of the internal debate:

“Can we launch an ephemeral experience that includes Highlights, up-to-date info from the US State Dept, DHS, links to donate to ACLU, etc?” the email added.

Several officials responded favorably to the overall idea. “We’re absolutely in…Anything you need,” one wrote.

But a public-affairs executive wrote: “Very much in favor of Google stepping up, but just have a few questions on this,” including “how partisan we want to be on this.”

“To the extent of my knowledge, we’d be breaching precedent if we only gave Highlights access to organizations that support a certain view of the world in a time of political conflict,” the public-affairs executive said. “Is that accurate? If so, would we be willing to open access to highlights to [organizations] that…actually support the ban?”

Pichai image source.

Discussion:

  • Read Pichai’s entire email to staff. Who is the audience and what are Pichai’s communication objectives? How well does he meet them? What organizational structure does Pichai use?

  • How well does Pichai take and assign accountability about Google’s search debate?

  • What’s your view of the internal email discussion? What, if anything, surprises you about this discussion? It was, of course, intended to stay internal.

Changes at Riot Games

Following allegations of sexism, Riot Games has apologized and is making changes. A long report by Kotaku placed blame mostly on the fast company growth and sexist working environment.

Trying to shed its “bro-culture” stigma, leaders have acknowledged that the company could be more inclusive. In a long statement last month titled, “Our First Steps Forward,” the company starts by apologizing to “to all those we’ve let down.” The statement then lists steps the company will take around inclusion initiatives, staffing, training, and so on

Frei.JPG

In a more recent statement, the company announced hiring a “leadership and strategy expert,” Frances Frei, who had also worked with Uber. The statement includes this quotation from Frei:

“After spending time with Riot’s leadership and many others across the organization, it became clear that Riot is truly putting everything on the table and committing to evolving its culture. In my interactions with Rioters, I’ve seen extraordinary levels of engagement on these issues across the company. Every Rioter with whom I’ve met truly cares about inclusion, which means real change is possible. Riot isn’t interested simply in fixing problems on the surface, it has the ambition to be an industry leader and to provide a roadmap for others to follow. I share that ambition and am eager to help Riot navigate this process.”

Frei image source.

Discussion:

  • Read Kotaku’s report. How credible do you find the investigation and reporting? What could increase the credibility?

  • Assess Riot Games’ statement. Who is the audience and what are the communication objectives? How do the organization, writing style, and tone affect your assessment?

  • Now assess the statement about Frei. What’s your view of including Frei’s statement? What else, if anything, should be included in the statement?

  • Overall, how well is Riot Games demonstrating accountability? What other leadership character dimensions are demonstrated?

Can You Identify Fake Facebook Pages?

A New York Times article asks readers to spot deceiving Facebook accounts based on posts. In the example below, which is from a fake page? 

FB posts.JPG
FB Post 2.JPG

If you guessed the one on the right, you are correct. The best indicator, according to the article, is the poor word choice and grammar at the top of the post: "live" should be "leave," and "End of the story" is atypical English and should read "End of story." Particularly to identify Russian posts, look for missing or misused articles (a, an, the). 

But some posters are getting more clever. In the example at right, we see that text is lifted from another source, so the writing style and grammar sound like native English. 

I just re-read 2017 Facebook guidelines about spotting fake news. Interestingly, the advice doesn't include looking carefully at grammar, proofreading, and punctuation. 

Cover image source.

Discussion:

  • In a way, aren't we giving into our biases if we assume that posts with poor grammar are from international sources that lack credibility? How do you reconcile this approach to spotting fake news?
  • How confident are you in spotting posts from credible sources? Under what circumstances have you been fooled in the past? 

In-N-Out Responds to Boycott

In-N-Out.PNG

Eric Bauman, chair of the California Democratic Party, called for a boycott of In-N-Out Burger for donating $25,000 to the GOP, but the company had a strong defense. Bauman tweeted to his 11,000 followers:

“Et tu In-N-Out? Tens of thousands of dollars donated to the California Republican Party . . . it’s time to #BoycottInNOut — let Trump and his cronies support these creeps . . . perhaps animal style!”

But Bauman didn't get support from his party. A spokesperson said, "It was his personal tweet and doesn’t reflect party policy. That said, he is giving force to a sentiment many people feel right now. Which is that, in this era, with the stakes so high, engaging in things like personal boycotts is a way for people to effect change.”

The California Republican Party also disputed the call:

“I have no idea what possessed the California Democrat Party chairman to attack a California institution like In-N-Out, especially considering the fact that the organization gave more money to Democrats than Republicans recently. I’m sure he got many angry phone calls from Democrats who have benefited from In-N-Out’s generosity, and that’s why he not only went dark following the tweet, but forced the party’s spokesperson to distance the party from the comments.”

In response to the charge, In-N-Out defended its giving and other practices.

Image source.

Discussion:

  • Like the Facebook employees' call to join a FB group, calling for a boycott is one way to get attention. In this case, is a boycott a good strategy? Why or why not?
  • Analyze In-N-Out's statement. How well does the company defend itself against the boycott?