Choate Apologizes for Sexual Abuse
Private school Choate Rosemary Hall, in Wallingford, CT, has uncovered sexual abuse by 12 faculty members. According to a report commissioned by the board of trustees, abuse going back to the 1960s was mishandled:
"Sexual misconduct matters were handled internally and quietly. Even when a teacher was terminated or resigned in the middle of the school year because he or she had engaged in sexual misconduct with a student, the rest of the faculty was told little and sometimes nothing about the teacher's departure and, when told, was cautioned to say nothing about the situation if asked."
Some faculty were given recommendations to transfer to other schools.
In a "Message to the Choate Rosemary Hall Community," posted on the website, the board chair and headmaster review the facts, thank the victims for coming forward, apologize, and promise action. The school hired Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN) to review its policies and make recommendations. One conclusion in the letter follows:
RAINN has noted the strength of Choate's current confidentiality, amnesty, retaliation, and mandatory reporting policies; progressive training and education for students; and faculty and staff who are caring, empathetic, and supportive while preventing and responding to sexual misconduct on campus. Their recommendations call for continued codification of policies and procedures for reporting and investigating incidents, further review and refinement of adjudication processes, and additional training for faculty and staff who respond to incidents of sexual misconduct. We believe a commitment to constantly improving standards will provide more understanding and protection for our students.
Discussion:
- I'm skeptical reading the excerpt above. So, your policies are great? You just need to follow them? And of course, you need to do training, which everyone seems to say in these situation. Read the entire letter and form your own opinion. Am I too harsh?
- Should Choate have this letter prominently on its website? I followed a link from The New York Times, but I don't see any reference to the statement. What are the arguments for and against posted something, say, on the home page?
Snapchat Is 'Only for Rich People'?
In 2015, did Snapchat founder Evan Spiegel say the app is "only for rich people" and that he didn't "want to expand into poor countries like India and Spain"? That's the claim by a former employee who is suing Snap Inc. for wrongful termination. Anthony Pompliano alleges he was fired after accusing the senior leadership team of inflating app metrics before the IPO.
Pompliano says the company falsely advertised the number of daily active users (DAU), violated a non-solicitation and non-compete agreement, and exaggerated growth and retention data. Pompliano claims that Speigel's response about poor countries came when he suggested going into international markets to expand the user base.
A representative for Snap responded:
"This is ridiculous. Obviously, Snapchat is for everyone! It's available worldwide to download for free. Those words were written by a disgruntled former employee. We are grateful for our Snapchat community in India and around the world."
Snap doesn't deny data discrepancies, but says they aren't as significant as Pompliano claims. Pompliano contends that the discrepancies indicate "a wide-spread, systemic failure in Snapchat's internal controls over its user data." A Fortune article warns that questions about user registrations and engagement could be important to investors, who bought stock in what Fortune calls a "giant IPO" that "just proved we're in a tech bubble."
Discussion:
- Let's assume Spiegel made those comments. Do you find them offensive, taken out of context, or something else?
- How well did Snap handle the response?
- How serious are Pompliano's claims? What effect, if any, do you think they might have on investors?
Sean Spicer Makes a Mistake
Another Hitler analogy gone awry? How is it possible? During a briefing with reporters, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer compared the use of chemicals by Hitler and President Bashar al-Assad of Syria:
"We didn't use chemical weapons in World War II," Mr. Spicer said. "You know, you had someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons."
When a reporter questioned the statement, Spicer may have made things worse:
"I think when you come to sarin gas, he was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing."
He then said people came into "Holocaust centers."
He tried to fix it: "I was trying to draw a distinction of the tactic of using airplanes to drop chemical weapons on population centers. Any attack on innocent people is reprehensible and inexcusable, but that didn't do it." Finally, he gave a fuller apology during an interview, although The New York Times calls it "contrite."
Discussion:
- Where did Spicer go wrong? Do you find his comments offensive? Why or why not?
- What's your assessment of his apology in the NBC News interview? Do you find it "contrite," as The New York Times says?
Wells Fargo Blames a Manager
An investigation led by Wells Fargo's board into the practices that led to thousands of false accounts blames Carrie Tolstedt, the former head of the retail division:
The root cause of sales practice failures was the distortion of the Community Bank's sales culture and performance management system, which, when combined with aggressive sales management, created pressure on employees to sell unwanted or unneeded products to customers and, in some cases, to open unauthorized accounts.
The report also says the former CEO John Stumpf was "too slow" to investigate possible issues. The report is public on Wells Fargo's website.
Tolstedt's lawyers dispute the allegations. Stumpf once referred to Tolstedt as the "best banker in America." Reuters reported:
Tolstedt was perceived by high-level employees as having the support of Stumpf, with whom it was considered best to avoid raising problems with.
"Stumpf was ultimately responsible for enterprise risk management at Wells Fargo, but was not perceived within Wells Fargo as someone who wanted to hear bad news or deal with conflict," the report said.
Duke Law School Professor James Cox told Reuters, "There's a tremendous amount of pressure from regulators to throw someone under the bus. If they don't, then Wells Fargo is going to be even more in the crosshairs."
In a statement, "Wells Fargo Statement Regarding Board Investigation into the Community Bank's Retail Sales Practices," CEO and President Tim Sloan summarized actions the bank has taken: // <![CDATA[ // <![CDATA[ // <![CDATA[ // <![CDATA[ // if this line executes, then javascript is turned on and we'll therefore remove the no-js class from the HTML tag document.documentElement.className = document.documentElement.className.replace(/(^|\s)no-js(\s|$)/, '$1$2'); // ]]> // ]]> // ]]> // ]]</p></div>
Infographic Gets Panned on Twitter
InvestmentZen, which encourages financial independence, created an infographic with advice for living on minimum wage, currently $7.25 per hour. Suggestions include selling your car, moving to a less expensive city, and recognizing that "a lot of the best things in life are free."
Reactions are generally not positive. Twitter users are taking offense at some of the advice, pointing out that, for example, not everyone has the flexibility to move across country. Part of the infographic identifies "excuses" for not moving, including "All of my friends and family live here." Sounds like a good reason to stay put to me, particularly for people living in poverty or close to it.
Others on the Twitter thread note the missing expenses of moving, doing laundry, and children should anyone choose to have them. An obvious logical flaw is in suggesting people sell their car, yet suggesting picking up some Uber shifts.
This reminds me (and others) of a 2013 McDonald's website with advice to employees, including getting a second job. To help employees manage expenses, the site showed a sample monthly budget with $25 for health insurance. McDonald's pulled the site and published this statement:
We have offered the McResource program to help our valued McDonald's employees with work and life guidance created by independent third party experts. A combination of factors has led us to re-evaluate, and we've directed the vendor to take down the website. Between links to irrelevant or outdated information, along with outside groups taking elements out of context, this created unwarranted scrutiny and inappropriate commentary. None of this helps our McDonald's team members. We'll continue to provide service to our folks through an internal telephone help line, which is how the majority of employees access the McResource services.
Discussion:
- Analyze the full infographic. What visual and organizational design principles from Chapter 9 in the text are used?
- What other logical flaws can you identify?
- Overall, do you find the advice useful, or does it enrage you as it does some Twitter users? Should InvestmentZen pull the infographic and issue a statement as McDonald's did in 2013?
Germany Proposes to Fine Companies for Illegal Content
The German government wants to fine Google, Facebook, and other social media sites if they don't remove "hate speech, fake news and other undesirable content" within 24 hours if it's considered "blatantly illegal" and within seven days if it's otherwise considered to be breaking the law.
A Politico article describes the decision:
"Facebook and Twitter missed the chance to improve their takedown practices," said Heiko Maas, federal minister for justice and consumer protection. Maas claimed social media networks don't take complaints seriously. "For companies to take on their responsibility in question of deleting criminal content, we need legal regulations."
According to one study, Facebook removed 33% of illegal posts within 24 hours so far this year-not enough for some critics-and Twitter did worse, removing only 1% within 24 hours. The social media companies argue that policing negative activity is nearly impossible given the volume of posts on their sites.
In Twitter's defense (it needs one), the company has published extensive policies, including those related to "Hateful Conduct." But bullying, threats of violence, and other misconduct have been an issue for Twitter since the beginning and continue to plague the site's credibility.
In related hate-speech news, AT&T, Johnson & Johnson, and other big companies are pulling ads on YouTube because they don't want them appearing next to inappropriate content. This is another, perhaps more effective, way to get the social media sites to take action.
Discussion:
- What's your view of Germany's proposed law: reasonable, necessary, unrealistic, or something else?
- What effect do you think such a law would have on the social media sites? How about its users?
Disney Won't Cut the Gay Scene
A gay scene in the new Disney "Beauty and the Beast" movie is causing a stir in other countries. The movie won't be shown in Malaysia because the company refuses to cut a three-second scene showing two male characters dancing together. A member of the censorship board said, "It is in our guidelines that we don't allow L.G.B.T. activity in movies in Malaysia. They are the ones not allowing the movie to be shown. We approved it with a minor cut."
Director Bill Condon called the interaction "a nice, exclusively gay moment," and Disney made a short statement about the controversy: "The film has not been and will not be cut for Malaysia."
Officials in other countries aren't happy about the scene either. A Russian lawmaker said it was a "blatant, shameless propaganda of sin," and although the country will show the movie, only those 16 years or older can see it.
Condon said of the characters: "LeFou is somebody who on one day wants to be Gaston and on another day wants to kiss Gaston. He's confused about what he wants. It's somebody who's just realizing that he has these feelings."
Discussion:
- What do you think of Disney's choice to include two men dancing in a movie?
- Should Disney cut the scene so the movie would be shown in Malaysia? If it makes a difference in your answer (does it?), The New York Times reports, "'The Jungle Book' last year had $967 million in global ticket sales, and Malaysia represented $5.7 million of that total."
- How do you assess Disney's short statement in response? Should the company say more? Why or why not?
Analyzing Trump's Tone in Speeches
How would you describe Trump's tone in his speeches? A New York Times article explains how sentiment analysis was used to compare his speeches over time and to other State of the Union addresses:
"That's according to a sentiment analysis of past speeches, which categorizes words according to several dimensions. Mr. Trump's campaign speeches used a high proportion of words associated with "anger" - like fight, illegal or bad - and a relatively low proportion of words with positive associations - like build, freedom or peace."
Sentiment analysis aside, his tone changes are pretty obvious. The best way I can describe his State of the Union address is "measured." He also gestured less and read more from the teleprompter-perhaps acting more presidential than we have seen him in less formal settings.
The Washington Post compiled the address "in 3 minutes." Of course, the compilation and the "winners and losers" identified by the author/editor are based on his own thinking about Trump/s plans and communications.
Discussion:
- How would you describe President Trump's tone in his State of the Union address? What, if anything, surprised you about the speech?
- The president certainly is adjusting to the audience and purpose of his speeches. Compare audiences for his campaign speeches and his official speeches as president. What are his objectives for each?
- With which of The Washington Post's conclusions do you agree and disagree? The author also refers to the speech as "strong." What do you think he means by this, and do you agree or disagree?
More Ethical Questions for Uber
Susan Fowler, a former Uber engineer, has blasted the company for what she describes as sexual harassment, a sexist environment, and HR's failure to respond. Fowler also reports that only 3% of engineers are women at Uber, which she claims has fallen over time.
When she reported sexual harassment, she was given a choice to move to another department or stay and likely receive a poor performance review. This is a basic "don't" in HR, from my experience: you don't move the victim and put him or her at a disadvantage. According to Fowler, no further action was taken in the case, although other women received similar treatment by the same manager.
At this point, Fowler's complaints are getting attention. CEO Travis Kalanick wrote that he would look into the situation:
"I have just read Susan Fowler's blog. What she describes is abhorrent and against everything Uber stands for and believes in. It's the first time this has come to my attention so I have instructed Liane Hornsey our new Chief Human Resources Officer to conduct an urgent investigation into these allegations. We seek to make Uber a just workplace and there can be absolutely no place for this kind of behavior at Uber -- and anyone who behaves this way or thinks this is OK will be fired."
Ariana Huffington, an Uber board member, jumped into the conversation on Twitter:
From interviews and messages from Uber employees, a New York Times article reports an "aggressive, unrestrained workplace culture." Kalanick further addressed the controversy in an email to employees that begins: "It's been a tough 24 hours. I know the company is hurting, and understand everyone has been waiting for more information on where things stand and what actions we are going to take."
Discussion:
- Read Fowler's blog post. What persuasive strategies does she use (logical arguments, emotional appeals, and credibility)? Which parts are most and least convincing?
- How should the company respond? An investigation is a good start: what should this include, how should it be carried out, and what result would you expect?
Milo Yiannopoulos Loses Speaking Engagement and Book Deal
Milo Yiannopoulos has an active following for the very reason he lost a speaking engagement and book deal: he's out there. A New York Times article refers to him as "a polemical Breitbart editor and unapologetic defender of the alt-right," and he seems to say whatever he wants, which isn't a bad thing-until it is.
Earlier this month, a college tour at UC Berkeley was canceled when protests ended in violence, and today, he lost the chance to speak at the Conservative Political Action Conference. The latest controversy comes from a video in which Yiannopoulos seems to condone pedophilia. Yiannopoulos denies the allegations and "blamed 'British sarcasm' and 'deceptive editing,'" according to the Times.
Simon & Schuster canceled plans for his book, "Dangerous." In a statement, Yiannopoulos said, "The people whose views, concerns and fears I am articulating do not sip white wine and munch canapés in gilded salons. And they will not be defeated by the cocktail set running New York publishing. Nor will I."
According to the Times article, Yiannopoulos's position at Breitbart is under consideration:
Mr. Yiannopoulos, who has railed against Muslims, immigrants, transgender people and women's rights, is a marquee contributor to Breitbart News, where he serves as senior editor. He has amassed a fan base for his stunts and often-outrageous statements. But by Monday afternoon, his future at the website was being intensely debated by top management.
One Breitbart journalist, who requested anonymity to describe private deliberations, described divisions in the newsroom over whether Mr. Yiannopoulos could stay on. There was some consensus among staff members that his remarks were more extreme than his usual speech, the journalist said, and executives were discussing by telephone whether his apology was enough to preserve his position at the site.
[Update: Yiannopoulos resigned from his Breitbart position.]
I saw Yiannopoulos for the first time on "Real Time with Bill Maher." What struck me most was this statement: "Mean words on the internet don't hurt anyone." Really? Who gets to decide?
Discussion:
- Did the organizers of the Conservative Political Action Conference and Simon & Schuster make the right decision? Did UC Berkeley?
- What's your perspective on Yiannopoulos' comment, "Mean words on the internet don't hurt anyone"? Who does get to decide?
Twitter's New Time Out for Bad Behavior
Twitter has been acting more and more aggressively against users who behave badly on the site with new rules for what's acceptable and what's not. Now, the company has started giving users a "time out" when tweets violate those rules. Actions may include limiting post views to followers. As the guidelines say, "Limiting the reach of potentially abusive content creates a safer environment and stronger Twitter community." 
Some users have complained about the practice, feeling that one word has gotten them into the dog house, but a Business Insider article interviewed an executive who gave a more holistic view of the decision process:
"A spokesperson declined to explain how Twitter determines if an account deserves to be temporarily restricted or totally suspended, but did say that the company looks at the overall context of an account's behavior rather than just potentially offensive keywords. So if an account repeatedly tweets offensive things to other accounts that don't follow back, Twitter could interpret that behavior as abuse and worthy of a time-out."
A page on Twitter's website explains five reasons to understand why "I'm seeing a message that my account is locked or limited": security purposes, account validation, rule violations, suspicious activity, or temporarily limited features, which is the latest addition.
Discussion:
- The decision to temporarily block reach could be tricky. What criteria do you think Twitter will use to determine whether this action is appropriate?
- In what ways will this new step be effective, and how might it fall short?
Will Chime Fix Meetings?
Amazon is introducing Chime, a new product for online meetings and videoconferencing. Described as "Frustration-free meetings with exceptional audio and video quality," Chime is designed to compete with products like Skype, Google Hangouts, and GoToMeeting.
GeekWire quotes an Amazon executive about the program:
"It's pretty hard to find people who actually like the technology they use for meetings today," said Gene Farrell, Vice President, Enterprise Applications at AWS in a press release. "Most meeting applications or services are hard to use, deliver bad audio and video, require constant switching between multiple tools to do everything they want, and are way too expensive."
Conference calls have become a joke. The video "A Conference Call in Real Life" has received more than 14.5 million views, and "A Video Conference Call in Real Life" has more than 700,000.
The Chime promotional materials focus on the technology, of course: ease of joining, automatic reconnection, mobile access, notifications, etc. But what about the people skills involved in managing a meeting? Isn't most of a meeting's success dependent on the leader and participants? Sure, technology can ruin an online meeting, but so can the people managing it.
Discussion:
- What, if anything, do you find appealing about Chime? How does it compare to other meeting programs?
- What percentage of an online meeting's success is attributable to the people? The technology? Is Chime over-promosing?
Former Starwood Exec Comments on the Acquisition
Former head of global development at Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Simon Turner talks openly at The Americas Lodging Investment Summit (ALIS) conference. In an interview, Turner acknowledges that in any acquisition, like the Marriott's purchase of Starwood, not everyone is going to still have a job.
Turner discusses the uncertainly, particularly with the last-minute bid from Anband Insurance, and the value of overcommunicating to avoid confusion.
Turner also describes the process and his feelings of attachment towards the people in his organization, which helped him avoid feeling "woe is me." He also had perspective considering some people spent their entire career at Starwood compared to his nine years.
In talking about the hotel business, Turner says, although executives compete with each other, there is a sense of camaraderie and respect, which Turner calls "one of the great things about our business."
Discussion:
- What does Turner mean at the beginning when he jokes, "I'm a cost synergy"?
- What lessons can we learn from Turner's views on communication?
- What's your view of Turner's perspective on the hotel business? Do you think this is true of some industries more than others? Why or why not?
Are Verizon and T-Mobile Going Too Far on Twitter?
T-Mobile's sex-themed commercial continued on Twitter with the company trading barbs with Verizon, the ad target. Actress Kristen Schaal stars in the ad and seemed to enjoy being "punished" by Verizon for going over her data plan.
Some thought the ad was cute, but the tweets seemed to get out of hand. A Mashable article sums it up well: "It was all pretty creepy coming from the marketing departments of two of America's biggest telecoms. And most Twitter users were not having it." Tweets encouraged the companies to end it:
- "K guys. This has OFFICIALLY gone too far."
- "50 Shades of Don't"
T-Mobile CEO John Legere is known for some outlandish behavior. A CNBC article this month calls his behavior "authentic," for example using the "f-bomb," and Legere explains why he is the way he is:
"The trick for me is, I really believe that I act, behave, and speak the same way my customers do. I say what they think on behalf of them. If you look, most of my colorful nature and antics is to drive change that benefits customers."
Discussion:
- Do you find the commercial itself funny?
- What's your view of the ongoing exchange between Verizon and T-Mobile? In this case, was it worth the risk of offending?
Trump Management: A Case Study
The New York Times asked business and management experts how well President Trump is shaping up to be a leader. The results aren't too good.
The article cites a Wall Street Journal conservative op-ed:
The conservative editorial page of The Wall Street Journal bemoaned a refugee policy "so poorly explained and prepared for, that it has produced confusion and fear at airports, an immediate legal defeat, and political fury at home and abroad."
An assistant professor of organizational behavior at Stanford said Trump should take her introductory MBA course, while a professor said his actions "are so far from any responsible management approach." Jeffrey Polzer, an HR professor at Harvard said, "It's really common sense: You want to surround yourself with talented people who have the most expertise, who bring different perspectives to the issue at hand. Then you foster debate and invite different points of view in order to reach a high-quality solution."
Polzer also said that a better approach "requires an openness to being challenged, and some self-awareness and even humility to acknowledge that there are areas where other people know more than you do. This doesn't mean decisions are made by consensus. The person at the top makes the decisions, but based on the facts and expertise necessary to make a good decision."
Discussion:
- What's your view of how President Trump has been running the country so far?
- Where's the disconnect? Compare the complexity of running a country and an executive branch of government to running a complex business.
- Maybe this is an adjustment period. Perhaps Trump needs some time to orient himself and adapt his management style. Try to make a case for this line of thinking if it's not your current view.
CEOs Respond to Trump's Executive Order
The New York Times reports "Frantic Phoning Among CEOs" about how they should address President Trump's ban on travel from Muslim-majority countries. Leaders want to oppose the ban but are concerned about "poking the bear," according to the article. The new president has taken tweet jabs at others, for example, the union leader involved in Carrier negotiations when he spoke out.
In a statement on the Starbucks website, Schultz opposed initiatives around DACA, building a wall, the Affordable Care Act, and immigration. He pledged to employ 10,000 refugees.
Mark Zuckerberg and Tim Cook also have come forward. Cook focused on Apple, of course: "In my conversations with officials here in Washington this week, I've made it clear that Apple believes deeply in the importance of immigration - both to our company and to our nation's future. Apple would not exist without immigration, let alone thrive and innovate the way we do." Other tech company leaders have weighed in their opposition: Airbnb, Uber, Lyft, Facebook, Google, Apple, Amazon, Expedia, and Microsoft.
The Times called financial firms' response more "moderate." For example, Lloyd Blanfein of Goldman Sachs said, "For us to be successful, our men and women must reflect the diversity of the communities and cultures in which we operate. That means we must attract, retain and motivate people from many backgrounds and perspectives. Being diverse is not optional; it is what we must be."
The article also noted energy and heavy industries' "mixed-bag" response, consumer and retail companies' resistance, and media and telecom's "no comment."
Discussion:
- What risks and rewards do CEOs face in addressing the travel ban?
- Why are industries responding differently? What does each have to lose or gain?
- Assess Howard Schultz's statement. While others are questioning how and whether to respond, he is on it. Why?
Kraft Heinz Gets Mixed Reviews for Holiday
Kraft Heinz won't have a commercial in this year's Super Bowl, but the company will give employees Monday off. Joking that the day after, #SMunday, should be a national holiday, Heinz started a petition on change.org:
"We can all agree that going to work the Monday after the ‘Big Game' on Sunday is awful," the petition states. "So as far as we're concerned at Heinz, we as a nation should stop settling for it being the worst work day of the year. We don't settle for that awesome football Sunday to be just like every other day of the year."
They're certainly getting mainstream press, for example, in The Washington Post, but the article refers to the move as a "Super Bowl stunt."
The company recently laid off thousands of workers, and the day off isn't available to factory employees. Some social posts call the campaign "pandering" and one tweet reads, "I think we have bigger things to worry about."
Discussion:
- What's your view of the campaign: pandering, clever, inappropriate, or something else?
- What about the timing? News from the Trump Administration is heavy is week.
Dippin' Dots Responds to Spicer
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer has periodically blasted Dippin' Dots via tweets over the years. Now the company has responded in an open letter.
In an NPR interview, the CEO of the ad agency said they were concerned about getting in the political mix, but people were expecting the company to respond, so they had little choice. The company executives decided how to respond: "Scott Fischer, the CEO of Dippin' Dots, and his executive team wanted to openly address the issue in a way which was transparent and stayed true to their brand values – fun, community, and camaraderie."
Dippin' Dots offered to serve the White House and press, but Spicer suggested treating the military and first responders. It's not clear how this might happen.
Discussion:
- How well did Dippin' Dots handle the situation? What were the risks?
- It sounds as though Dippin' Dots responded because of the social outcry. Should the company have jumped into the conversation with Spicer earlier? How could they have done this?
Diversity Training at Delta
In response to two recent incidents, Delta crew members will attend diversity training that company executives already attended.
In one situation, CEO Ed Bastian banned a passenger after seeing a video of him yelling about Trump. In a statement, the company said the passenger should not have been allowed to fly. In another situation, covered by BizCom, an African-American doctor was questioned about her credentials and discouraged from helping a sick passenger.
The planned program includes unconscious bias and microaggressions-two current topics in diversity and inclusion circles. That's good because traditional diversity training programs haven't been found to be effective. A 2012 HBR article, "Diversity Training Doesn't Work," faults programs for causing more problems than they solve, and a 2016 BizCom story reiterated the point covered in a 2016 article.
Discussion:
- What's your view of diversity training programs? Are you skeptical like me?
- How could covering topics of unconscious bias and microaggressions be different?
- What difference do you think the training will make at Delta?
Campaign Debrief Gets Heated
A postmortem campaign session at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government "erupted into a shouting match," according The Washington Post. Hillary Clinton's communications director Jennifer Palmieri blasted the Trump campaign:
"If providing a platform for white supremacists makes me a brilliant tactician, I am proud to have lost. I would rather lose than win the way you guys did."
Palmieri was emotional during the discussion; the Post reported that she "choked up at various points of the session."
Kellyanne Conway, Trump's campaign manager, took her share of shots:
"Guys, I can tell you are angry, but wow. Hashtag he's your president. How's that? Will you ever accept the election results? Will you tell your protesters that he's their president, too?"
Discussion Starters:
- What's your view of the exchange? In what ways is this discussion productive, and how did it fall short?
- Someone on the Trump team said of the Clinton team, "You guys are pathetic." Do you agree? Is this just about "sour grapes"?
- Are people still saying "hashtag"?