Hotel Cleaning Caught on Video
Housekeepers in 14 hotels in China were caught on video using a towel or sponge to clean multiple surfaces, including toilets, showers, and glassware. Hotels included W Hotel Beijing, Bulgari Hotel in Shanghai, InterContinental Beijing Sanlitun, Hilton Beijing, Beijing JW Marriott Hotel, Peninsula Beijing, and Shangri-La Hotel Beijing.
So far, five of the hotels have issued statements. The Peninsula wrote, “The hotel will still take measures to strengthen the implementation of the standard procedures for room service staff to ensure all aspects meet the established standards of the Peninsula.” Park Hyatt in Beijing referred to the situation as an isolated occurrence.
China's Ministry of Culture and Tourism ordered hotels to review their practices and called for an investigation.
Discussion:
What oversight should hotels have for room cleaning?
Analyze Park Hyatt's message: audience, communication objectives, writing style, and so on. How well does the company address the situation?
This isn’t the first time such as report has become public about luxury hotels. Do you think these cases are isolated, as the Park Hyatt claims, or systemic?
Nissan Chairman Is Arrested
Nissan’s chairman was arrested for financial misconduct, including under-reporting his income in securities fillings. Carlos Ghosn may have been engaging in improprieties for years.
The news came as a surprise to many. Ghosn is a popular business figure, credited with turning around Nissan, Renault, and Mitsubishi by forming an alliance and directing cost-cutting and layoffs. According to a Wall Street Journal article, the shock is felt particularly at Renault; a union leader described the reaction as “a feeling of stupefaction and a lot of anger.”
The French government has a 15% state in Renault, so President Emmanuel Macron also weighed in: “As a shareholder, the French state will remain extremely vigilant regarding the stability of the alliance.” At this point, officials are still trying to sort out the news and determine leadership going forward.
Nissan CEO Hiroto Saikawa delivered a news statement, translated in English on Bloomberg. The company also issued this matter-of-fact statement.
Nissan image source. Ghosn image source.
Discussion:
Why would a successful business executive engage in financial misconduct? What leadership character dimensions are lacking?
How does financial impropriety go on for years in a situation like this? Who should be accountable for the misconduct?
Assess Saikawa’s news statement. What works well to improve brand image, and what could be improved?
Controversy About Wildfires
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?
Google Employees Protest Sexual Harassment
Thousands of employees walked out of more than 20 Google offices around the world on Thursday to protest how the company handled sexual harassment charges. Employees in California, Berlin, Dublin, London, Singapore, Tokyo, Zurich, and other locations organized under the group, “Google Walkout For Real Change.”
The reaction came after a New York Times article revealed several senior-level managers left the company, quietly, because of sexual harassment. Some were given large financial payouts.
In addition to a more transparent process, employees are asking for an end to pay equity and forced arbitration, which requires employees to settle cases within the company and denies them the right to sue.
In response to the walkouts, CEO Sundar Pichai said, “Employees have raised constructive ideas for how we can improve our policies and our processes going forward. We are taking in all their feedback so we can turn these ideas into action.”
Discussion:
How do you view the walkouts: a waste of time, overstepping, a productive way to protest, or something else? Respond to the same question for their list of demands.
What, if any, impact do you think the walkouts will have on company practices? Googlers did encourage the company’s decision to end an artificial intelligence contract with the Defense Department.
What leadership character dimensions are illustrated by the situation?
GM Offers Employee Buyouts
To cut costs, General Motors is offering voluntary severance packages to 18,000 employees. The company is taking this path before mandatory layoffs, which could happen if not enough people leave voluntarily.
To receive an offer, employees must have been with GM for at least 12 years and be on salary (not an hourly wage), which means more senior-level employees will be leaving. Typically, these employees are in managerial positions and are paid more highly, so the move means more savings.
The company is focusing on its most profitable regions and already cut salaried staff from about 90,000 to 77,000 after selling off its European divisions. At the same time, GM is staffing up technology functions to compete in the self-driving car market. Through its Cruise division, GM is planning to introduce a ride-sharing, autonomous vehicle in 2019.
Office image source. Cruise image source.
Discussion:
Why would a company choose a voluntary severance model instead of mandatory layoffs?
What factors should employees consider before deciding to take a package?
Reversal at Maryland
The University of Maryland has reversed its position on keeping football coach DJ Durkin. At first, Durkin was reinstated after a damning report about player abuse which resulted in the death of a student, Jordan McNair. Critics say the University’s Board of Regents overstepped in disallowing Loh to terminate the coach.
Now, pressure from students, players, the McNair family, and politicians left the University with no choice but to fire Coach Durkin. In a letter, President Loh explained the decision, including his previous concerns about Durkin’s return.
McNair’s father made a statement, including a message to President Loh when asked:
“The same thing I’ve always said to Dr. Loh. I’ve always commended Dr. Loh for having a level of integrity and doing the right thing even since he first initially came to the hospital, and secondly, when he came to us as a family to apologize and to take full moral and legal responsible for the tragic events that happened.”
In the meantime, Maryland players were involved in an altercation. It seems as though this situation has divided the team as well.
UPDATE: James T. Brady, chairman of the University System of Maryland’s Board of Regents, resigned last week, and President Loh is winning back his power. A Chronicle article notes that Loh won the “battle waged in the court of public opinion,” and whether he will leave the University as planned is now unclear. In a statement, Brady explained his decision and, using the word “proud” three times, cites board accomplishments during his tenure.
Discussion:
How is this situation an issue of integrity?
The regents had planned to terminate President Loh. Should they reverse this position too?
What should the University do now to repair its image?
We have heard nothing that I found from the regents (except their confidence in Coach Durkin). Should they communicate something now? What could they say that could help instead of hurt the situation?
Emotions and Political Views After Synagogue Shooting
A shooter killed eleven people and wounded several others, including three police officers, in a Pittsburgh synagogue. Officials report that the act was motivated by hate, and the shooter is quoted saying, “I just want to kill Jews.” The Washington Post calls it, “The deadliest attack on Jews in the history of the United States.”
President Trump condemned the shootings: “This wicked act of mass murder is pure evil . . . . hard to believe and, frankly, something that is unimaginable.” The president also promoted the idea of armed guards: “If there were an armed guard inside the temple, they would have been able to stop them. Maybe there would have been nobody killed except for him, frankly.”
Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto disputed this view: “The approach we need to be looking at is how we take the guns—the common denominator of every mass shooting in America—out of the hands of those looking to express hatred through murder.”
During a news conference, Pittsburgh Public Safety Director Wendell Hissrich gave an emotional statement, calling the crime scene “horrific.”
Discussion:
We see Hissrich’s emotions during the news conference. He demonstrates authenticity and vulnerability. How do you view his delivery?
President Trump’s comments during this time are controversial. What’s your view? How might your own feelings about gun advocacy or gun control affect your perspective?
Tesla Investigated for Fraud
Tesla is facing a new challenge this week: a U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) criminal probe into whether the company misstated production data and therefore misled investors. The investigation will focus on Model 3 sedans.
A Wall Street Journal article explains part of the issue. CEO Elon Musk tweeted on July 2, 2017, “Looks like we can reach 20,000 Model 3 cars per month in Dec.“ But reports at the time showed a less optimistic picture. The result was only 2,700 cars produced for the entire year.
A spokesperson said the FBI document requests were voluntary and defended the company:
“When we started the Model 3 production ramp, we were transparent about how difficult it would be, openly explaining that we would only be able to go as fast as our least lucky or least successful supplier, and that we were entering ‘production hell.’ Ultimately, given difficulties that we did not foresee in this first-of-its-kind production ramp, it took us six months longer than we expected to meet our 5,000 unit per week guidance. Tesla’s philosophy has always been to set truthful targets –- not sandbagged targets that we would definitely exceed and not unrealistic targets that we could never meet. While Tesla gets criticized when it is delayed in reaching a goal, it should not be forgotten that Tesla has achieved many goals that were doubted by most. We are enormously proud of the efforts of the whole company in making it through this difficult ramp and getting us to volume production.”
Discussion:
What’s your view of Musk’s statement compared to the result: arrogance, entrepreneurial optimism, or something else?
How well does the Tesla spokesperson address the investigation? What else, if anything, should the company say at this point?
In what ways does the company demonstrate a lack of vulnerability in this situation?
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
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?
Facebook's War on "Fake News"
Facebook has taken several steps to banish incorrect information on the site. The company provides three examples of questionable news items and the action they took, including what they missed.
In some of these situations, stories were doctored with images from related situations. One image, with the caption, “Man from Saudi spits in the face of the poor receptionist at a Hospital in London then attacks other staff,” represents a situation that happened at a veterinary hospital. The post explains, “On Facebook, we’ve seen years-old images of violent acts, protests and war zones reposted and used to inflame current racial or ethnic tensions.”
Another story promised that NASA would pay people $100,000 “to stay in bed for 60 days.” Although this may sound appealing—and it did garner millions of Facebook views—again, this claim referred to an older article in which a journalist was paid $18,000 for staying in bed for 70 days. But the offer no longer stands.
A Standard study reports that Facebook’s efforts are working to reduce misinformation, although we don’t yet see the same effects on Twitter: “Interactions then fell sharply on Facebook while they continued to rise on Twitter.“ A Mashable report explains:
“Mark Zuckerberg and company may be on the right track when it comes to fighting fake news, but as you can see from those engagement numbers, it’s not a success story quite yet. Even with the downward trend over the past 2 years, Facebook is still responsible for much more of the spread of fake news than a social platform like Twitter.”
Discussion:
How do you interpret Facebook’s progress?
Assess the Facebook post. How well is the company taking responsibility and explaining what still needs to be done?
Facebook's Messaging Over Time
The Wall Street Journal reports how Facebook has repositioned itself since its founding in 2004.
In 2005, at Harvard, founder Mark Zuckerberg said Facebook’s purpose is to ”look people up” and for “connecting to people.” In 2008, Facebooke expands and messages focus on helping people “share information. . . and share parts of their identity with each other.” In 2010, Zuckerberg’s vision enlarged: “People can have instantly social and personalized experiences everywhere that they go.” Soon after, Zuckerberg focused on problem solving.
In 2012, Zuckerberg said, “Our mission isn’t to be a public company. Our mission is to make the world more open and connected.” By 2013, Zuckerberg was seeing Facebook’s role in selecting governments, getting healthcare access—improving people’s lives.
More recently, given concerns about privacy and misinformation, Zuckerberg’s messages focus on responsibility.
Discussion:
The WSJ video has a negative connotation about Facebook’s changing message, particularly in light of today’s news about shareholder proposals to split Zuckerberg’s roles. Do you agree with this assessment?
How well has Zuckerberg handled messages about the evolution of Facebook in the past 14 years? What, if anything, can he do differently now?
Do you agree with the proposal to split the CEO and chairman jobs? In other words, does Zuckerberg have too power? Does he need help at this point?
How is Facebook’s evolving messaging a potential matter of integrity?
Senators Send Harsh Letter to Google
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.
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.
Climate Change Report
If you weren’t already concerned about climate change, a new UN report may change your thinking. The extraordinary report, written by dozens of scientists from 40 countries who reviewed more than 6,000 studies, reveals a bleak picture for the Earth’s future. The introduction, titled “Chapter 1: Framing and Context” is 61 pages, and the rest of the report is a long, deep dive into the data.
The most significant conclusion is that global warming must be limited quickly. The authors write with great urgency that the Earth’s temperature has already increased and that further increases will create heatwaves, eliminate ice in the Arctic Ocean, melt massive ice sheets, devastate coral reefs, and produce intense storms. Further, global warming will result in more poor people: "Climate change is projected to be a poverty multiplier, which means that its impacts make the poor poorer and increase the total number of people living in poverty.”
The authors suggest limiting the planet's warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-Industrial Revolution temperatures to avoid catastrophic results. They also warn that this requires "rapid, far-reaching, and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society."
A New York Times article, “Dire Climate Warning Lands With a Thud on Trump’s Desk,” describes President Trump’s disinterest in the report findings. Similarly, a text search on today’s Wall Street Journal home page finds an article about Exxon but nothing about the UN report.
Discussion:
Analyze the report audience, objectives, writing style, and organization. Which business writing principles are followed?
What improvements would you make to improve report readability?
What are your views about climate change? What evidence leads to your conclusions?
WhatsApp Message Causes Dramatic Infibeam Stock Price Drop
Infibeam, an India e-commerce company, lost more than 70% of its stock value after a WhatsApp message questioned the company’s governance. The message was reported to be sent by an analyst at Equirus Securities months ago, but it only recently surfaced and went viral. Equirus denies involvement.
An India Times article explains the message:
“The note said the company gave an interest-free and unsecured loan to a subsidiary with negative net assets to be repaid over eight years. The note also mentioned that the company has re-classified its co-founder, who continues to hold a large chunk of shares, as non-promoter.”
An Infibeam spokesperson responded to the controversy:
“The company has given interest-free unsecured loans to its wholly owned subsidiary NSI Infinium Global since inception. These loans are short-term loans which are repayable on demand and have been utilised by NSI solely for its business and operations. Further, there has been no change in the promoters from the list of promoters identified and disclosed by the company info in the offer documents for its IPO.”
Discussion:
How can people do a better job at distinguishing between real reports and rumors?
How well did Infibeam respond to the news? What effect do you expect on the company stock on Monday?
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.
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?
Nike Addresses Kaepernick on Earnings Call
On a quarterly earnings call, Nike CEO Mark Parker addressed head on the new ad campaign with former NFL player Colin Kaepernick. Following strong first-quarter earnings and revenue growth, Parker expressed confidence in Nike’s sponsorship agreement, particularly related to social media engagement:
“How we look at it is how do we connect and engage in a way that’s relevant and inspiring to the consumers that we’re here to serve. Our brand strength ... is a key dimension that contributes to the ongoing momentum that we’re building across the Nike portfolio.”
About an ad campaign that also features athletes Serena Williams and Lebron James, Parker said,
“These are actually very inspiring athletes, and again we feel like that campaign has delivered on that message in a way that’s really connected with people around the world.”
But the stock did fall in after-hours trading after the earnings report. Analysts say investors expected more than 10% revenue growth, and they note this is the first quarter since a sexual harassment scandal hit the company.
Discussion:
The company executives tout the campaign results on social media. How much do these results matter compared to the earnings report?
Maybe this is another example of how quarterly reports aren’t the best measure of company performance. Should we be looking longer term? Why or why not?
Uber Rebranding
In the past, Uber had been criticized for questionable business practices and ethics, and the company is still trying a turnaround. They hired Dara Khosrowshahi in August 2017 and distanced themselves from founder Travis Kalanick.
Now Uber has a new branding initiative. The marketing campaign, "Doors Are Always Opening,” is credited to 72andSunny, a Los Angeles firm.
A video shows significant events in people’s lives—giving birth, meeting your partner’s parents—and how people rely on Uber.
Paulie Dery, Uber's executive creative director, describes the objectives as follows:
"What we are really saying is opportunity happens everywhere if you are willing to move. You know what happens when you sit still? Nothing. And I think that is a great Uber story. We've always had a certain amount of hustle and belief that movement creates something better for everybody, and that's really at the center of the idea."
The company also has a new logo: simply the company name, which insiders hope will become a verb, like Google.
Discussion:
Uber’s previous campaign was called “Moving Forward” to distinguish the company’s controversial past with its future. How well do you think this new campaign will accomplish its objectives?
What’s your view of the new logo, simply the company name?
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
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.”
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?
Disneyland Employees Speak Out
Disney employees are on screen in a New York Times op-ed video, "I Work at the Happiest Place on Earth. Why Can’t I Pay My Rent?" A 30-year concierge and a cosmetologist are featured more prominently. One is currently living in her car, and another says, tearfully, that she has spent time in her car. Both say they love their jobs, but along with 75% of Disneyland employees, they can't afford to pay "basic expenses every month." Data comes from a questionnaire and report, "Working for the Mouse."
The argument is for Disney to pay a living wage, and the call is for citizens to vote for an Anaheim proposal that affects Disneyland employees and some local hotel workers. In the video, one claim is that real wages have declined because of inflation—what $15 per hour bought seven years ago isn't the same today.
Business leaders who are fighting the measure say that the increase would hurt jobs. One local Chamber of Commerce member argued, "We estimate 3-4,000 jobs lost over next year or two by companies having to absorb this new increased cost. They're going to reduce hours and reduce jobs."
Senator and former presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is also featured in the video. He is proposing a bill he calls "Stop BEZOS" to tax Amazon and other large companies for public assistance received by their employees. The idea is for companies with 500 or more employees to pay the government back for support paid to their employees who cannot survive on earned wages.
Discussion:
- How well does the video make the case for higher wages? Which are logical and which are emotional appeals? What evidence is presented?
- Assess the credibility of the questionnaire and report, "Working for the Mouse." From your assessment, what makes the report both credible and questionable? In what ways does the report reflect business communication standards, and in what ways does it fall short?
- Research the impact of raising wages on industry, for example, this Cornell report. What's your view of this argument? It's a complicated question because of different industries, locations, labor supply, rates, etc.
- In what ways do the employees featured in the video demonstrate courage? What risks did they take in appearing on screen?
Twitter Denies Shadow Banning
"Shadow Banning" was a big topic at yesterday's Senate Intelligence Committee hearings with Facebook and Twitter. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey denied the claim that tweets are suppressed based on political ideology. But he did admit that candidates' tweets were affected in search results.
In a blog post, Twitter executives explained the definition of shadow banning and denied the practice. The post also explains how search results are ranked:
- Tweets from people you’re interested in should be ranked highly
- Tweets that are popular are likely to be interesting and should be higher ranked
- Tweets from bad-faith actors who intend to manipulate or divide the conversation should be ranked lower
The executives confirm a technical issue that prevented Republican politicians tweets from showing up in searches, but they write, "some Democratic politicians were not properly showing up within search auto-suggestions as result of this issue." Like Dorsey, they don't specify numbers affected on each side.
Discussion:
- Assess Dorsey's response to Representative Joe Barton's questions. How well did he respond? How do you assess his delivery skills?
- How well does Twitter take responsibility in the blog post?
- How well does the blog post explain the situation and defend the search results?