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.”

Image source.

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

Image source.

Discussion:

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

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

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

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

Megyn Kelly Terminated from NBC

NBC Today Show host Megyn Kelly said she thought it was acceptable to wear blackface for Halloween. Kelly might need to brush up on the history of blackface, which started in minstrel shows in the 1800s. Then, like now, blackface reinforced racial stereotypes and was terribly demeaning to black people.

Kelly apologized on the show, but people were still upset. Her colleague, Al Roker, said “she owes a bigger apology to folks of color around the country.” NBC waited two days, but insiders say she will be terminated.

Here’s the full text of her email to NBC staff:

Dear friends & teammates –

One of the wonderful things about my job is that I get the chance to express and hear a lot of opinions. Today is one of those days where listening carefully to other points of view, including from friends and colleagues, is leading me to rethink my own views.

When we had the roundtable discussion earlier today about the controversy of making your face look like a different race as part of a Halloween costume, I suggested that this seemed okay if done as part of this holiday where people have the chance to make themselves look like others. The iconic Diana Ross came up as an example. To me, I thought, why would it be controversial for someone dressing up as Diana Ross to make herself look like this amazing woman as a way of honoring and respecting her?

I realize now that such behavior is indeed wrong, and I am sorry. The history of blackface in our culture is abhorrent; the wounds too deep.

I’ve never been a “pc” kind of person — but I understand that we do need to be more sensitive in this day and age. Particularly on race and ethnicity issues which, far from being healed, have been exacerbated in our politics over the past year. This is a time for more understanding, love, sensitivity and honor, and I want to be part of that. I look forward to continuing that discussion.

I’m honored to work with all of you every day.

Love,

Mk

Image source.

Discussion:

• What’s your view of Kelly’s original comments?

• Assess Kelly’s email. Do you find her apology meaningful, insincere, or something else?

• Did NBC do the right thing by firing her? Why or why not?

• We await a statement from NBC. Draft one on behalf of the company.

• Which leadership character dimensions are illustrated by this situation?

Racist Comments on a Ryanair Flight

People are calling for boycotts of Ryanair because staff didn’t address a passenger’s racist comments on a flight from Barcelona to London. The man went on a rant towards a 77-year-old, Jamaican-born, British passenger, calling her an "ugly black bastard” and “a stupid ugly cow."

The passenger tried to get the woman to move to another seat: "I don't care whether she's f------ disabled or not. If I tell her to get out she gets out." He also threatened her: “If you don't go to another seat, I'll push you to another seat.” The woman’s daughter said she was taking her mother on a trip after her husband had died.

Although other passengers tried to silence the man and called for him to be removed from the plane, staff seemed to do very little. Even after the incident was reported, the company posted a meager response on Twitter.

Later, the company also said, "As this is now a police matter, we cannot comment further."

Image source.

Discussion:

• What could be Ryanair’s rationale for not removing the man from the plane? Was it the right decision?

• Why didn’t Ryanair say more after the incident? What, if anything, should the company leaders have said?

Marriott Labor Strikes

More than 8,000 Marriott employees are going on strike to fight for higher wages and more input into decisions that affect them. Represented by the union Unite Here, workers represent 23 hotels across the country, and the number may grow.

A Marriott International spokesperson told Skift:

“We are disappointed that Unite Here has chosen to resort to a strike at this time. During the strike our hotels are open, and we stand ready to provide excellent service to our guests. We continue to bargain in good faith for a fair contract. While we respect our associates’ rights to participate in this work stoppage, we also will welcome any associate who chooses to continue to work.”

The GM of a Westin property told guests they would put their sustainability program “in effect for all guests for the duration of the work stoppage. Your room will be cleaned every third day of your stay, and any additional cleaning services you would like are available on request.”

According to the article and online reviews, guests are noticing. As one wrote, “The normal services you associate with a hotel were severely reduced, along with the attention provided with a RC [Ritz-Carlton] stay, were no longer available.”

Unite Here is negotiating with Marriott for three improvements:

(1) Wages high enough so that workers do not have to work multiple jobs to earn a living wage; (2) a voice in determining how much automation and what kind of automation makes its way into the hotel industry; and (3) better measures for workplace safety.

Marriott image source. Striker image source.

Discussion:

• If successful, the strike could inspire more hospitality workers to join the union. Is that a good result? Why or why not?

• What’s your view of the employees’ requests: not enough, reasonable, outrageous, or something else?

• What leadership character dimensions are demonstrated or not demonstrated by this situation?

Teacher Recommendation Letters Influence Harvard Decision

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

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

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

Image source.

Discussion:

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

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

Woman Fired for Racial Profiling

A woman refused to let a black man into her apartment, and she was subsequently fired from her job. Hilary Mueller is shown on video, taken by D'Arreion Toles, asking to see his key fob and questioning who Toles was going to visit in the building. Toles eventually moved past Mueller, who followed him to his apartment door.

When the video was posted, it attracted more than 5 million views. Toles included the captions, "to be a black man in America" and "this is America in 2018." Complicating matters, Mueller called the police after the incident. Also, Mueller’s husband posted a video condemning her behavior. They have been separated for more than a year.

Mueller’s employer, real estate firm Tribeca-STL, also saw the video and terminated her employment. An ABC report includes a statement from the firm:

"The Tribeca-STL family is a minority-owned company that consists of employees and residents from many racial backgrounds. We are proud of this fact and do not and never will stand for racism or racial profiling at our company."

As of this writing, both the company website and its Twitter feed are unavailable.

Discussion:

• Explain how this incident is an example of racial profiling.

• Do you agree with the firm’s decision to fire Mueller? Why or why not?

• In what ways did Mueller demonstrate and fail to demonstrate integrity and humility?

Harvard Admissions Case In Progress

The class action lawsuit against Harvard University has begun, with the defendant’s arguments focused on the value of diversity. The university is charged with discriminating against Asian-Americans based on its “race-conscious” policy.

In the closely watched case in Boston, the plaintiff argued that Harvard’s system of rating students on academic achievement, athletic ability, extracurriculars, and personality encourages skewed ratings in the last category based on race. The plaintiff attorney said, “Diversity is not on trial here,” and instead explained that Asian-American applicants are admitted at lower rates than they would be based on their academic achievement.

Harvard sent letters to students in underrepresented states if they scored well on their PSATs. But the encouragement to apply varied based on race. White students needed at least 1310 on the verbal and math sections in these states; however, nationwide, Black, Hispanic, and Native American students needed at least 1100. For Asian-American students, the threshold was higher: 1350 for females and 1380 for males.

Harvard defended its practices, claiming the university “cannot achieve educational goals without considering race.” The defendant’s attorney gave the diverse courtroom as an example of the benefit of the university’s policy. Also in defense, a representative from the NAACP said, “A colorblind approach means that you close your eyes to the full lived experiences of applicants.” Part of Harvard’s defense is that people cannot be separated from their race—it is part of the whole of who they are.

Harvard image source. Harvard library image source.

Discussion:

• What’s your view of Harvard’s admissions policy?

• How might you have been advantaged or disadvantaged by affirmative action practices in applying to school or to jobs? How, if at all, does your experience factor into your perspective?

• The plaintiffs argue that Harvard is secretive about its approach. What is the value of keeping an admissions policy private, and how could this privacy be harmful?

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.

Google logo image source.

Discussion:

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

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

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

• Google may have been avoiding its own vulnerability.

Facebook Policy Executive Sat Behind Kavanaugh

Joel Kaplan, Facebook’s vice president for global public policy, sat behind his friend, Brett Kavanaugh, during the charged hearings to determine whether he would win support as the next Supreme Court justice. Because of his position at Facebook, employees questioned his loyalties and whether it was appropriate for him to be so visible during the judge’s testimony about whether he sexually assaulted a woman as a teenager.

His appearance was a “surprise” to employees, and hundreds wrote about their concerns on Facebook’s intranet site. One employee wrote, perhaps expressing the sentiment of Facebook’s liberal employees:

“Let’s assume for a minute that our VP of Policy understands how senate hearings work. His seat choice was intentional, knowing full well that journalists would identify every public figure appearing behind Kavanaugh. He knew that this would cause outrage internally, but he knew that he couldn’t get fired for it. This was a protest against our culture, and a slap in the face to his fellow employees.”

Kaplan defended participating, referring to their 20-year friendship, and CEO Mark Zuckerberg said he didn’t violate any company policies by attending, although he did say he would not have made the same decision. Employees wanted to hear from COO Sheryl Sanberg about Ford’s accusations, and she was not forthcoming, according to a Times article. But she did comment on Kaplan’s attendance:

“As a woman and someone who cares so deeply about how women are treated, the Kavanaugh issue is deeply upsetting to me. I’ve talked to Joel about why I think it was a mistake for him to attend given his role in the company.”

Cover photo source.

Discussion:

• Read additional Facebook messages in the Times article. How would you summarize employees’ concerns?

• What’s your view of Kaplan’s attendance? Consider the “optics” in addition to company policy.

• Some might say that Kaplan was being authentic by sitting behind his friend. Do you agree with this view? Why or why not?

• Which character dimensions are illustrated by this story?

Crisis at Sloan Kettering

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

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

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

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

Thompson photo source.

Discussion:

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

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

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

Are U.S. Campuses Coddling Students?

A new book, The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure, explores the impact of political discourse on U.S. college campuses. The book is an expansion of an Atlantic article in which Jonathan Haidt, one of the book authors, disputed “trigger warnings” and other anxiety-avoiding tactics.

The authors are clear that harassment and discrimination are wrong, and that students who experience them should report the incidents. But, according to a Bloomberg article, we may lose the ability to communicate with each other:

“They worry about the What worries him is the looseness of the term ‘bias’ and the idea that students are urged not to work out their concern with the alleged perpetrator but to report it directly to the authorities.”

Also concerning the authors is the high percentage of liberal faculty members. A recent study shows that 39% of the most elite liberal arts schools have no Republican professors. The Bloomberg writer notes the possible negative effect:

"Critics argue that the atmosphere of liberal orthodoxy increases the risk that graduates will enter the workforce without knowing how to confront political viewpoints different from their own.”

Cover image source.

Discussion:

• What’s your view? Are we coddling students, or do they need more protection and “safe spaces”?

• How would you describe the differences among discrimination, harassment, and bias?

• How might the issue of protecting people from bias contribute to sexual harassment in the workplace? How can we help people sort out problems at an interpersonal level?

Papa Johns Rebranding

Papa John’s will lose the apostrophe, signaling a distancing from its founder and owner, John Schnatter. An AdAge article chronicles issues with Schnatter, starting with his blaming the NFL’s handling of players “taking a knee” and ending with his taking out an ad in a Louisville, Kentucky, newspaper, shown here. The ad reads, “The Board wants to silence me” and points to his own website, savepapajohns.com.

The final straw was when Schnatter used the “n” word and made other questionable racial comments on a conference call. Soon after, Schnatter was removed from the board of directors.

With the slogan, “Better Ingredients. Better Pizza,” the company hopes to divert attention from Schnatter back to the pizza.

Discussion:

• What’s your view of the revised company name? To what extent will the change achieve the company’s objectives?

• Take a look at Schnatter’s website. The AdAge article says, “Who’s to say whether it’s delusional . . . “ What do you think? What does Schnatter hope to achieve, and how well does the site achieve his objectives?

Amazon Employees Take Bribes to Delete Negative Reviews

Amazon is investigating its own employees for taking money through intermediaries to help sellers. Sellers report being offered and receiving confidential data, such as search key words, to help boost sales on the site.

The trouble seems most serious among Chinese Amazon employees, who work for lower salaries and may have more incentive to supplement their wages. A Wall Street Journal article describes the process:

Brokers search for Amazon employees on Chinese messaging platform WeChat and send messages asking them if they would like to provide these services in exchange for cash, according to brokers and sellers who say they have been approached by brokers.

The going rate for having an Amazon employee delete negative reviews is about $300 per review, according to people familiar with the practice. Brokers usually demand a five-review minimum, meaning that sellers typically must pay at least $1,500 for the service.

An Amazon spokesperson defended the company’s practices: “We hold our employees to a high ethical standard and anyone in violation of our Code faces discipline, including termination and potential legal and criminal penalties,” and “We have zero tolerance for abuse of our systems, and if we find bad actors who have engaged in this behavior, we will take swift action against them.”

With more than two million independent sellers on the site, competition can be fierce. Sellers have been known to encourage fake reviews and repeated clicks for higher rankings.

Discussion:

• Which principles of ethical decision making come into play in this situation? In other words, how do we know that the employees’ behavior is unethical?

• We might say that Amazon employees in China are underpaid, and that’s why they are taking money on the side. Does this justify their behavior? Why or why not?

Accusation and Defense of Brett Kavanaugh

On the final days of interviews with Brett Kavanaugh to become a Supreme Court Justice, a woman has accused him of sexual assault when they were teenagers, more than 30 years ago. Professor Christine Blasey Ford wanted to stay anonymous, but she is now known as the one who claims Kavanaugh assaulted her at a Georgetown Preparatory School party when she was 15 and Kavanaugh was 17. She revealed her allegation in a letter to her congressman. Dr. Blasey believes that she would have been raped if Kavanaugh weren’t drunk. Both will testify on Monday.

For leadership and business communication students, let’s look at the arguments on both sides. Here is some of the evidence presented so far:

• Twenty-four women who attended private school with Dr. Blasey supported her in a signed letter “to attest to her honesty, integrity, and intelligence.” (For some letter-writing history, read the defense of Professor Avital Ronell and the subsequent explanation.)

• Dr. Blasey passed a polygraph test, but critics say the test is imperfect for proving truthfulness.

• Although Dr. Blasey doesn’t remember some details (for example, whose house they were at), trauma experts say this is typical for people who experience such a trauma.

• Kavanaugh denies the incident: “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

• Mark Judge, Kavanaugh’s roommate at the time, said, “I have no memory of this alleged incident." Dr. Blasey claims he was in the room during the incident. Judge also said, "It's just absolutely nuts. I never saw Brett act that way.” He also said they were raised in Catholic homes that didn’t tolerate such behavior and that Kavanaugh was “brilliant” and not “into anything crazy or illegal.” Judge wrote a book, Wasted: Tales of a GenX Drunk, about his time at Georgetown Prep.

• Kavanaugh’s high school yearbook has become public and is “raising eyebrows,” as MSNBC and CNN both report. The yearbook includes captions such as “Do these guys beat their wives?” and “100 kegs or bust,” indicating a party culture. Mark Judge’s yearbook page, shown here, includes a quote: “Certain women should be struck regularly, like gongs.”

The FBI and/or congressional investigation is a nearly impossible task. Does this evidence help?

Cover image source. Yearbook image source.

Discussion:

• Which of these evidence points do you consider most and lease relevant to the question of whether Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Dr. Blasey?

• What biases might you bring to the analysis? Think about your own assumptions and how they might affect your interpretation.

• What advice would you give to members of Senate Judiciary Committee as they decide what happened and, ultimately, whether Kavanaugh should be elected to the highest court position.

Serena Williams Controversy

Serena Williams lost the U.S. Open women’s final tennis match and criticized umpire Carlos Ramos. A Washington Post article delves into “whether sexism, conscious or not, skews the playing field.”

The writer offers the following evidence:

• Ramos still has support from the International Tennis Federation.

• London Telegraph published data showing that, for the past 20 years, men received code violation fines almost three times as often as women. The writer acknowledges that men’s games are longer, but she says this doesn’t account for the entire difference.

• An Australian newspaper criticized for what some consider a racist image of Williams boldly republished it on the cover with the headline, “Welcome to the PC World.”

The writer offers more evidence on both sides of the issue and suggests changes within the association.

Williams image source.

Discussion:

• Read more about the situation if you are unfamiliar. What could Williams and Ramos each have done differently?

• What’s your view overall? Was Williams treated unfairly? Did she react appropriately?

• How do you assess Williams’ response after the incident? How well did she recover from the so-called “outburst”?

• What leadership character dimensions are illustrated by this situation?

JD.com CEO Arrested for Sexual Misconduct

Richard Liu, founder and CEO of Chinese e-commerce company JD.com, was arrested in Minneapolis for sexual misconduct. Because of his high profile and billionaire status, Liu’s arrest was the most popular topic of conversation on social media in China last week.

Two people describe a case involving a student at the University of Minnesota, part of a joint doctoral program in business administration with Tsinghua University. Liu was released without bail and has returned to China. He denies any wrongdoing, and JD.com posted a statement in Chinese, translated by a student:

Sunday, Sep. 2, 2018

We have noticed that there are rumors and false accusations about Mr. Qiangdong Liu on Weibo (Chinese social media site, similar to Twitter) recently. We hereby declare as follows: Liu was falsely accused while in the US on a business trip, but the police investigators found no misconduct and that he would continue his journey as planned. The company will take necessary legal action against false reporting or rumors.

Monday, Sep. 3, 2018

So far as we know, Mr. Liu was arrested on Aug. 31, 2018 in Minneapolis for investigation. He was released from custody shortly. There was no accusation or bail required for the release. Mr. Liu has returned to China and will resume his business activities as originally planned.

In addition to the stock price drop and embarrassment this causes Liu and JD.com, the company may have a governance problem. Liu is required to attend board meetings in person (although he may be able to join via video or telephone). Without him, as an 80% voting rights owner, the board may be unable to make decisions for the business.

A New York Times article focuses on China’s fascination with self-made billionaires as celebrities. Online discussions featured photos of Jack Ma laughing at Liu’s trouble.

Liu image source.

Discussion:

• I don’t see a statement or press release from Liu or from the company in English. Should Liu or the company publish something at this point on the website? Why or why not?

• What should the company do now to manage through this crisis?

• How does the Chinese reaction compare to situations in the United States? Can you think of a similar situation when Americans were fascinated by a leader’s hardship?

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.

Image source.

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.

Cover image source.

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?

Facebook Memo from Conservative Employees

Reminiscent of last year's Google memo titled "Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber," a group of politically conservative employees at Facebook wrote a memo titled "We Have a Problem With Political Diversity." The message is similar: employees who hold conservative views do not feel included at the company.

The memo emphasizes two major points:

• "We are a political monoculture that’s intolerant of different views."
• "We do this so consistently that employees are afraid to say anything when they disagree with what’s around them politically."

The writer includes some evidence, and business communication students may want more. The end of the memo, which is much shorter and less divisive than Google's, includes a call to action: for interested employees to join a Facebook group, now showing 1422 members.

Discussion:

• Assess the memo for organization. Are the headings clear and parallel? What are the strengths, and what could be improved?
• Now assess the evidence. Which facts and examples do you find most and least convincing? What additional evidence would improve the arguments?
• What's your view of the employees' approach? Do you find the memo and call to join a Facebook group an effective choice for the company? What could be some alternatives? 
• In what ways is this situation an example of diversity and inclusion at Facebook?
• In what ways does the memo demonstrate courage?