Tonys Recap: Speeches and Politics
As usual, the annual Tony awards was a star-studded night with fancy clothes and big celebrities. But this year, the show got political.
Most significantly—or most viral—was Robert De Niro's "F-bomb" preceding President Trump's name. He received a highly positive reaction from the Hollywood audience, with people cheering and standing. The comment, which De Niro repeated, was censored in the United States, but an Australian feed let it roll, so it's available in full on YouTube.
A highlight of the night was hearing graduating students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL, where a shooter recently killed 17 people and left more injured. Students sang "Seasons of Love" from "Rent" and encouraged us to "measure your life in love." A Washington Post article referred to this segment as "the most moving moment" of the night.
Discussion:
- What's your view of De Niro's outburst: inappropriate, inspiring, or something else?
- How would you respond to the same question about the high school students?
- One could argue that De Niro is "just being his authentic self." How would you respond to this perspective?
Valedictorian's Speech About Sexual Assault Is Cut Short
Just as a high school valedictorian started talking about sexual assault at the school, her mic was cut off. Lulabel Seitz, in Petaluma, CA, had planned to discuss issues of students, including herself, being silenced after reporting incidents of sexual misconduct. The school administration warned her to avoid the topic in her speech: “For weeks, they have threatened me against ‘speaking against them’ in my speech. Sometimes we know what’s right and have to do it despite the threats.”
When the time came for her speech, Seitz said, “Because the class of 2018 has demonstrated time and time again that we may be a new generation, but we are not too young to speak up, to dream and to create change, which is why even when some people on this campus, those some people..." And then there was silence from the podium as her classmates cheered her on: "Let her speak."
She did continue, on YouTube, where she uploaded her complete speech and the ending to her sentence: “And even learning on a campus in which some people defend perpetrators of sexual assault, and silence their victims, we didn’t let that drag us down.”
This story exemplifies the Streisand Effect, which The Economist describes as demonstrating "how efforts to suppress a juicy piece of online information can backfire and end up making things worse for the would-be censor." The Effect was named when performer Barbra Streisand sued the California Coastal Records Project for including pictures of her Malibu house. The suit was considered frivolous, and photos of the home went viral, giving Streisand far more attention than she would have otherwise received from the Coastal Project.
In the case of the high school student, the administration silenced her during the ceremony, but her YouTube video, as of this writing, received almost 230,000 views, far more than the number of people who attended graduation. Also, now the school's handling of sexual misconduct situations is on full display.
The school responded with a short statement:
"Administrators and staff in Petaluma City Schools care deeply about the safety and well being of our students. Due to student privacy issues, we cannot and should not respond with specific information. We can say that when issues of sexual assault come to our attention, local law enforcement has initial jurisdiction and determines the course of action."
Discussion:
- What, if anything, should the school administrators have done differently before Seitz's speech?
- What is Seitz's responsibility? Should she have avoided discussion of sexual assault, as she was instructed by school officials?
- What else should school officials say now? How can they repair the district's image and address issues raised?
- How is this an issue of integrity for the school and for Seitz?
More About the Roseanne Situation
Reactions to Roseanne's tweets and her firing raise interesting questions about communication. Let's look at decisions and responses from five groups: cast members, ABC executives, conservatives, the makers of Ambien, and President Trump.
Cast Members
Perhaps the most immediate and vocal reaction came from Sara Gilbert, who plays one of Roseanne's daughters on the show. Although she likely has a lot to lose, Gilbert did not hesitate in expressing her anger at Roseanne's tweet about Valerie Jarrett.
ABC Executives
A New York Times article sheds more light on ABC's decision to cancel the show. Channing Dungey, appointed to lead ABC Entertainment in 2016, is the first African-American woman in such a senior leadership role at a network. With this decision, which was supported by more senior-level executives at ABC, Dungey has made her mark and won praise from other entertainment executives.
Conservatives
Political conservatives support Roseanne and blast the media and firing for silencing her voice. A writer for InfoWars, which has connections to radio host Alex Jones, referred to Roseanne's extraordinary ratings and the "PC police." Conservatives see this as another example of censorship of the right.
Ambien
After the firing, Roseanne returned to Twitter and seemed to blame sleep drug Ambien for her comments: "It was 2 in the morning and I was ambien tweeting." The drug maker Sanofi responded quickly to defend its "side effects."
President Trump
The president also has jumped into the conversation, which contradicted his press secretary's claim: "That's not what he's spending his time on." President Trump's tweet took aim at CEO Bob Iger:
"Bob Iger of ABC called Valerie Jarrett to let her know that 'ABC does not tolerate comments like those' made by Roseanne Barr. Gee, he never called President Donald J. Trump to apologize for the HORRIBLE statements made and said about me on ABC. Maybe I just didn't get the call?"
The president and Roseanne are mutual fans.
Discussion:
- Which, if any, of these reactions surprise you?
- Assess Ambien's response. How well did the company defend the brand?
- Should President Trump have involved himself in this situation? Why or why not?
"Roseanne" Gets Cancelled After Racist and Islamophobic Tweet
The revival of TV show "Roseanne has gotten a lot of press, and now there's more, but not for good news. The new season addressed political and social issues, with Roseanne, on the show and in real life, a Trump supporter, and she has a transgender and a black grandchild on the show.
But Roseanne crossed the line in a tweet, criticizing former President Obama's adviser Valerie Jarrett as a mix between "muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes.” The missive was part of a series of tweets about Roseanne's view that Jarrett covered up inappropriate actions during the Obama Administration.
At first, she defended her post as "a joke": “ISLAM is not a RACE, lefties. Islam includes EVERY RACE of people.” Roseanne eventually apologized.
ABC Network's response was swift and direct. CEO Robert Iger announced that the show will be cancelled.
Although Roseanne was ABC's most popular show, it was suspiciously not mentioned during the network's recent earnings call until someone asked a question. Perhaps issues existed before this tweet.
Discussion:
- What's your view of the tweet? Does Roseanne's role as a comedian excuse it? Is she just being her authentic self? Or something else?
- Did ABC make the right decision? What are the consequences either way?
MSU's Denial as a Cultural Issue
A Chronicle of Higher Ed article blames Michigan State University's ambitions and culture for their leaders' lack of response to years of sexual abuse on campus. More than 12 people knew of complaints against physician Larry Nassar, but the abuse continued for years.
Lou Anna K. Simon's leadership is questioned in the article. Although clearly a committed leader to the university, Simon is criticized for focusing so much on "two decades of status-climbing" that a culture of denying any wrongdoing evolved. One of the trustees summed up the issue in a letter and emphasized "We must embrace our obligation to apologize and offer justice."
Apologizing may be a sore subject for the trustees because Simon avoided it in the case of Larry Nassar's victims, according to the Chronicle article:
She talked about how “it is virtually impossible to stop a determined sexual predator and pedophile, that they will go to incomprehensible lengths to keep what they do in the shadows.” She often used “regret,” “sympathize,” and “acknowledge” in her written statements, but not “apologize.” She emphasized that sexual assault is a societal problem, not a Michigan State one. She highlighted all of the steps the university had taken to prevent sexual misconduct.
Discussion:
- Analyze the trustee's letter. What principles of business writing are followed? What are the strengths of the letter, and what could be improved?
- The trustee encourages MSU leadership to listen. What does he mean by this, and how would listening help the situation?
- What is the value of apologizing and admitting failure? What are the potential downsides, particularly for a university trying to improve its stature?
- This story illustrates several failings of leadership character. Which can you identify, and which do you think are most relevant here?
Instagram's New Bully Filter
Instagram has implemented a new technology that will not display comments considered bullying. The program, run by artificial intelligence (AI) technology, can detect “offensive and spammy” comments in English and in at least eight additional languages. Although the filter is set by default, users can "opt out" if they want to see such comments, or they can include specific words to screen out.
In an Instagram post, shown here, and in a longer post titled "Protecting Our Community from Bullying Comments," CEO and Co-Founder Kevin Systrom promised more diligence, particularly to protect young users:
We also believe in promoting kindness — encouraging our community to support one another both on and off Instagram. On Saturday we will host a Kindness Prom to celebrate people in our community who are spreading positivity. These young leaders are inspiring their peers by helping kindness, acceptance and support grow on Instagram and in the world.
Research shows the danger of online bullying: of 2,000 middle schoolers in the study, those who experienced cyberbullying were twice as likely to attempt suicide than those who did not experience cyberbullying.
Discussion:
- Analyze Instagram's announcement of the filter. Who are the audiences, and what are the communication objectives? How well does the message achieve those objectives?
- What's your view of Instagram's response to the problem of cyberbullying? Are the company leaders doing enough, or should they do more?
- How does this news relate to the leadership character dimension vulnerability?
MTA Criticized for Lack of Transparency
Commissioners at the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) questioned increasing costs and whether the agency has been transparent. Of particular concern are additional costs of about $1 billion and cost overruns for a project that resulted in 19 instead of 32 subway stations getting renovated. One commissioner said, “It is indefensible that we did not receive this information prior to it being reported in the press." The governing body discovered the information from a Wall Street Journal article.
Chairman Joe Lhota, who was appointed last summer, acknowledged that the agency has been working on being more transparent:
“Not a second in a day goes by when I don’t think about transparency at this agency and what we need to do to provide information to all of you."
NY Mayor Bill de Blasio and New York City Council Speaker Corey Johnson requested more transparency about spending and service improvement measurements and asked for monthly briefings and an "evaluation of efficacy."
Discussion:
- How would you define transparency, and how does it relate to accountability?
- After reading more about the situation, how would you assess the agency's actions? Do you agree with the commissioners' assessment? If you believe a lack of transparency exists, do you think it's intentional? Does it matter if it is?
- Why do organizations lack transparency? What do they potentially gain and lose?
- What do you think an "evaluation of efficacy" means?
More About the Starbucks Bias Situation
After the arrest of two black men in a Philadelphia store, Starbucks announced that 8,000 stores will close on May 29 for racial-bias training. But are some skeptical about the impact that one day of training will have, and the company seems to be imitating Chipotle's decision to close stores for food safety training. On the other hand, the company could have blamed the employee who called the police, a crisis communication strategy we have seem in many other situations.
An article in the New York Times describes racial bias research in hospitality customer service and may tell us more about the incident in Philadelphia. In one study, researchers sent emails to hotels using different names that reflected gender and race, asking for restaurant recommendations. Responses indicated racial bias, as the authors describe: "Hotel employees were significantly more likely to respond to inquiries from people who had typically white names than from those who had typically black and Asian names."
In addition, researchers analyzed "politeness," for example, whether employees wrote "best" or "sincerely" before signing their name. They were more likely to use such words when responding to guests with names that sounded white, and the authors describe another finding for this group:
They were three times as likely to provide extra information — even when the initial inquiry was just about restaurants — to white than to black or Asian people.
In addition to training, the authors suggest periodic customer service audits and consistent scripts and policies.
In a turn, Philadelphia Police Commissioner Richard Ross has apologized to the two men who were arrested. In his original video, Ross defended the officers actions and said, based on a sergeant's experience at Starbucks, "they are at least consistent in their policy." But in the news conference, Ross says, "shame on me" and "I have to do better."
Discussion:
- What's your view of the research about customer service at hotels? What does the research potentially say about the situation at Starbucks?
- Have you experienced bias in a customer service setting? What was the situation, and how did you handle it?
- How well does Ross handle the apology in the news conference? How does his identity factor into his response? How does he demonstrate authenticity, vulnerability, and other leadership character dimensions?
Volkswagen Replaces Chairman
Three years after the emissions scandal, Volkswagen is replacing another chairman. Matthias Müller replaced Martin Winterkorn, who was ousted soon after the news broke in 2015. But Müller was another insider and hasn't led the turnaround the board expected.
Like Winterkorn, Müller struggled with public relations. During a 2016 NPR interview, Müller claimed the company misunderstood the American environmental law: “We didn’t lie. We didn’t understand the question [at] first.” After much criticism, VW’s communications department asked for another interview, which was granted. He delivered a better apology but blamed the first interview on “all these colleagues of yours and everybody shouting.” In other words, it was noisy.
As is customary in corporate change announcements, Chairman of the Supervisory Board Hans Dieter Pötsch spoke positively about the outgoing executive:
“Matthias Müller has done outstanding work for the Volkswagen Group. He assumed the chairmanship of the Board of Management in the fall of 2015 when the Company faced the greatest challenge in its history. Not only did he safely navigate Volkswagen through that time; together with his team, he also fundamentally realigned the Group’s strategy, initiated cultural change and, with great personal commitment, made sure that the Volkswagen Group not just stayed on track but is now more robust than ever before. For that, he is due the thanks of the entire Company.”
The new chairman, Dr. Herbert Diess, offers more hope. Diess joined the board in 2015 and is known for having conflicts with the union and for cost-cutting. He may shake up the status quo at VW and inspire real action. The company has aggressive plans, including building greener cars—for real this time.
Image source (VW cover).
Image source (Diess).
Discussion:
- Assess the company's statement about this change. Who are the primary and secondary audiences? What are the communication objectives? How well does the statement meet those objectives?
- Why do these statements typically include positive quotes about outgoing executives, even if they are asked to leave or, as this statement indicates, they leave "by mutual agreement"?
- What lessons do you think Volkswagen learned since the scandal?
- Why would the board appoint someone who is considered divisive?
Howard University Reports on Misappropriated Funds
Howard University's investigation has concluded that $369,000 had been misappropriated by six employees who were terminated last year. A full report by the university identifies how they "double dipped" by receiving both tuition assistance and university grants between 2011 and 2016.
In a cover letter to the report, President Wayne A.I. Frederick wrote, “Howard University is committed to uncovering any impropriety in the administration of university-provided financial aid and federal student aid, to remediating all problems identified during this investigation, and to maintaining a robust compliance program to prevent any inappropriate dealings in the administration of financial aid."
A Washington Post article reports that the university tried to avoid going public before the review was completed, but an article posted online made this impossible. Student protests, which went on for more than a week, also may have sped up the timing.
Discussion:
- What business writing principles does the report demonstrate and fail to demonstrate? How could the report be improved?
- Assess the president's cover letter. Who are his primary and secondary audiences, and what are the communication objectives? How well does the letter achieve those objectives?
- What can the university do now to restore trust?
- How well does the university take responsibility for the situation?
Mario Batali Wants to Move On
Is it too soon? Mario Batali, accused of sexual harassment and removed from the company bearing his name, is exploring a new venture. In December, reports of sexual misconduct rattled the Batali & Bastianich Hospitality Group, and Batali admitted that accusations “match up with ways” he behaved. At the time, he emailed an apology but lost ground when he included a "P.S." with a recipe for making cinnamon rolls.
Now, about four months later, people report that Batali is exploring his options. Reports say he is considering moving to the Amalfi Coast, aiding displaced Rwandans, or creating a new company.
A New York Times article speculates that Batali may be in a good position to return to public life:
He still has legions of fans and colleagues who admire and respect his generosity, culinary knowledge and charisma. Many still post their interpretations of his recipes on Instagram, ask him for selfies on the street or urge his return to “The Chew” on Facebook. His restaurants continue to attract customers.
Friends also say that he is truly taking time to be introspective and to learn from his mistakes. But not everyone agrees that a comeback would be appreciated. Anthony Bourdain, for example, isn't ready:
Retire and count yourself lucky, I say that without malice, or without much malice. I am not forgiving. I can’t get past it. I just cannot and that’s me, someone who really admired him and thought the world of him.
Discussion:
- What's your view? Is it too soon, or is the time right for a Batali return? What should he consider in making this decision? What are the potential implications for women who complained about his behavior and for the company?
- Batali mentions wanting to understand his "blind spots." What does he mean by this?
Facebook Under Scrutiny
Questions about Facebook's role in user privacy are getting increasingly serious, and shareholders are getting worried. Company shares fell 7% after the news that third-parties used FB users' personal information without permission.
Analysts say we know that Facebook monetizes users' data, but the number of people affected (50 million) and the extent of the violation is dramatic. One concern is how much additional regulation the company will face in the future. Already, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is investigating whether Facebook violated a 2011 settlement in which the company promised to get users' consent before changing certain privacy settings.
We have no comment yet from Mark Zuckerberg or Sheryl Sanberg, and critics say they need to be out in front of this.
Discussion:
- A Bloomberg reporter called the company "tone deaf," but others say it's an impossible situation to fully address at this point. What's your view?
- What, if anything, should company leaders say? What could explain their silence?
- In what ways is this situation an issue of integrity for the company?
Toys R Us Closes
https://www.toysrusinc.com/restructuring
Toys R Us will close its remaining 735 U.S. stores and will lay off about 33,000 employees around the country. The company tried to survive after a bankruptcy filing in 2017, but the retailer can't compete with large stores, such as Walmart, and online sellers, such as Amazon.
Critics say Toys R Us failed to generate excitement, as one analyst describes in The Washington Post article:
“The liquidation of Toys R Us is the unfortunate but inevitable conclusion of a retailer that lost its way. Even during recent store closeouts, Toys R Us failed to create any sense of excitement. The brand lost relevance, customers and ultimately sales.”
A professor of brand management echoed this theme:
“We know that customers are willing to pay more for an enjoyable experience — just look at the lines at Starbucks every day — but Toys R Us has failed to give us anything special or unique. You can find more zest for life in a Walgreens.”
New York Senator Chuck Schumer is asking for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to ensure that customers aren't left "holding the bag" if they can't cash in or buy products with gift cards, particularly those recently received in December for Christmas.
Toys R Us has only a short statement on its website announcing the liquidation.
Discussion:
- Should the company leaders say more about the decision? What else, if anything, could be included in the statement?
- In addition to legal responsibilities, do company leaders have ethical responsibilities to make good on outstanding gift cards? Why or why not?
- In what ways has the company failed to learn from failure?
Fired by Tweet
According to an NBC report, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson learned he was fired when President Trump posted a tweet. The President did call Tillerson in for a face-to-face meeting, but this happened "several hours after the president had publicly announced Tillerson's firing on Twitter." The White House claims that Tillerson was put on notice that his time was coming to an end, but Tillerson says he was shocked at the news.
The relationship had been rocky. The two disagreed over policy issues, such as the Russian's government's involvement in U.S. elections and negotiations with North Korea. In July of last year, Tillerson referred to President Trump as a "moron."
Of his termination, Tillerson said,
"What is most important is to ensure an orderly and smooth transition during a time that the country continues to face significant policy and national security challenges."
Discussion:
- What is the best way to deliver bad news?
- We have heard of many business situations in which employees are fired by text message. How does this situation compare?
- In what ways is this situation a matter of leadership character, for example, compassion or integrity?
Bias in Online Courses
A Stanford University study found biases in how instructors interact with students in online courses. In a review of 124 Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in a variety of subjects, researchers found that responses to comments vary by students' race and gender:
Each comment was randomly assigned a student name connoting a specific race and gender. We find that instructors are 94% more likely to respond to forum posts by White male students. In contrast, we do not find general evidence of biases in student responses. However, we do find that comments placed by White females are more likely to receive a response from White female peers.
The study is significant because it identifies teachers' potential responsibility for different student learning outcomes. In other words, it's difficult to isolate why teachers respond differently to students because the students may, for example, be less prepared or have less ability. But in this study, the issue is clearly isolated: teachers tend to favor students based on race and gender, which were randomly assigned by way of fictitious names.
Discussion:
- How well do these results match your own experience as a student?
- What are the implications of this study for instructors?
- What potential flaws or issues do you identify with this study?
United Backs Off of Bonus Plan
United announced moving to a lottery system for employee bonuses, but backlash caused management to rethink the plan. President Scott Kirby had distributed a memo describing the new process:
"As we look to continue improving, we took a step back and decided to replace the quarterly operational bonus and perfect attendance programs with an exciting new rewards program called 'core4 Score Rewards.' "
The new program would include cash and other prizes and one quarterly prize of $100,000, which would be given to a random, eligible employee. Following the criticism, a spokesperson tried to clarify:
"We announced a new internal program based on United meeting certain operational and dependability metrics as a way of offering meaningful rewards to our employees. We believe that this new program will build excitement and a sense of accomplishment as we continue to set all-time operational records that result in an experience that our customers value."
Employee comments were harsh:
"Why should I be happy watching another employee get rewarded for my hard work? How would you feel if Oscar (United CEO Oscar Munoz) played roulette with your incentive package and it went to another vice president through a lottery drawing."
"This is truly disappointing. The current program 'costs' the company approximately $150 per 75,000 employees per quarter, totaling over $11 million. This new 'improved' program that we are supposed to be so excited about will cost the company $3.5 million per quarter. This saves the company about $8 million per quarter. Does Willis Tower really think the average front-line employee is stupid?"
In a second memo three days later, Kirby announced a pause on the program, saying they would "consider the right way to move ahead" and "will be reaching out to work groups across the company, and the changes we make will better reflect your feedback."
Discussion:
- What went wrong? Was it the bonus/lottery plan, the way it was announced, both, or something else?
- One employee commented, "Wow. I thought our morale was already as low as it could go, but I guess that was naive thinking on my part. I'm finally starting to understand that there will always be room for management to make me feel even less appreciated than I already do. How many times must they be taught, that if the employees aren't happy, no one is happy." What should the company leaders do now?
- The memos and employee comments were on an internal United system. What are the ethics of forwarding internal communications to the media?
More Companies Take Action to Curb Gun Sales
Dick's Sporting Goods has taken a strong stance on gun control. In a statement, the company announced it will no longer sell assault-style rifles and will no longer sell firearms to people under 21 years of age. The statement dances the fine line between both sides of the gun control debate:
We support and respect the Second Amendment, and we recognize and appreciate that the vast majority of gun owners in this country are responsible, law-abiding citizens. But we have to help solve the problem that’s in front of us. Gun violence is an epidemic that’s taking the lives of too many people, including the brightest hope for the future of America – our kids.
Walmart also announced it will no longer sell to people under 21 years of age. The company ended some firearm sales in 2015, so this policy further restricts what people can purchase when.
Companies are in a tough spot. Dicks, Walmart, Delta, and other companies have suffered backlash for their decisions, including people promising to boycott.
Discussion:
- Compare Dick's and Walmart's statements. How do they differ? Which is more effective and why?
- Describe Dick's choices. What are the risks and rewards of the announcement?
- Should other CEOs jump into the controversy? How might the decision depend on industry, customer base, or the leader him- or herself?
Companies Distance Themselves from the NRA
Following the school shooting in Florida, several companies are distancing themselves from the National Rifle Association. The organization lists many member benefits on its website, including travel and insurance discounts, but these are shrinking as more companies are discontinuing services.
For example, several major car rental companies—Enterprise Rent-A-Car, Alamo Rent a Car, National Car Rental, Avis, Budget, and Hertz—and major airlines, such as United Air Lines and Delta, will eliminate discounts for NRA members.
The NRA posted a statement on its website to deflect blame, reinforce its mission, and deny the impact of these companies' actions:
FAIRFAX, VA – The more than five million law-abiding members of the National Rifle Association have enjoyed discounts and cost-saving programs from many American corporations that have partnered with the NRA to expand member benefits.
Since the tragedy in Parkland, Florida, a number of companies have decided to sever their relationship with the NRA, in an effort to punish our members who are doctors, farmers, law enforcement officers, fire fighters, nurses, shop owners and school teachers that live in every American community. We are men and women who represent every American ethnic group, every one of the world’s religions and every form of political commitment.
The law-abiding members of the NRA had nothing at all to do with the failure of that school’s security preparedness, the failure of America’s mental health system, the failure of the National Instant Check System or the cruel failures of both federal and local law enforcement.
Despite that, some corporations have decided to punish NRA membership in a shameful display of political and civic cowardice. In time, these brands will be replaced by others who recognize that patriotism and determined commitment to Constitutional freedoms are characteristics of a marketplace they very much want to serve.
Let it be absolutely clear. The loss of a discount will neither scare nor distract one single NRA member from our mission to stand and defend the individual freedoms that have always made America the greatest nation in the world.
Discussion:
- Did these companies make the right decision? Some NRA members are boycotting them as a result.
- In its statement, the NRA refers to companies' "shameful display of political and civic cowardice." Do you see their actions as cowardice, courageous, or something else? What is the difference?
Misleading Headlines About the Market Dip
The stock market took a dive this week, but headlines are making it sound worse than it is. Here are three examples:
- FoxNews: "Investors hope for reversal after biggest stock market dip of all time"
- The Guardian: "Australian and Asian stock markets slide after Dow suffers biggest one-day points fall – as it happened"
- CNBC: "Dow's nearly 1,600-point plunge marks its biggest one-day point drop ever"
The headlines are technically correct that a nearly 1,600 point decline is the largest in U.S. history, but looking at only the point value is misleading. A percentage drop would be a better indication of the effect. This table represents the largest daily stock market losses. The display below is sorted by point loss; the table at right is sorted by percentage. You can see that 2018-02-05 falls in rank when we look at the percentage.
Also, the stock market has had incredible gains this past year, so the 26,000+ value could be viewed as an anomaly, and most analysts didn't believe those gains were sustainable.
Discussion:
- What are the ethical considerations for news agencies publishing these headlines?
- What might be a more appropriate headline for the news?
Perhaps this one-year chart helps keep the loss in perspective. It includes today's rebound of 567 points.
Questions of Transparency
The long-awaited memo written by Republican staff members about potential impropriety from the Justice Department and F.B.I in the Russia investigation has been revealed. Now, The New York Times editorial board is calling, once again, for President Trump to reveal his tax returns:
Since the Republicans are now on board with greater transparency, they will no doubt push President Trump to release his tax returns, as every other major-party presidential nominee has done for the past four decades, won’t they?
How about the White House visitor logs, which the Trump administration started hiding from the public last year? Or, say, the names of all foreign governments and officials who have stayed — at their own or at American taxpayers’ expense — at Mr. Trump’s Washington hotel, at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida or at his golf courses and his other businesses since he became president? Or the names of every foreign business with which the Trump Organization has a financial relationship, especially in countries where America has sensitive foreign policy interests, like China, India, Russia, Turkey or Saudi Arabia?
The reasoning sounds like reciprocity, but the argument may not get no more traction now than it did during the presidential campaign. A Pew research study in January 2017 showed that 60% of those surveyed believed Trump "has responsibility" to release his returns. Although some were adamant about the release at the time, the Wall Street Journal, for example, reported that the returns wouldn't tell us much anyway.
Discussion:
- What are the advantages and downsides of President Trump revealing his tax returns?
- Read the entire opinion piece. What other arguments do the authors make?
- Do you agree with their reasoning? Why or why not?
- How would you describe the tone? Does the approach help or hurt the argument?