Home > Uncategorized > The NYTimes Shoddy Editing Results in Spreading of Mis-Information… or MAYBE Dis-Information

The NYTimes Shoddy Editing Results in Spreading of Mis-Information… or MAYBE Dis-Information

March 6, 2018

I just wrote a letter to the NYTimes to tell them that one of their flagged comments in today’s op ed article by David Webber regarding pensions is false! In response to Mr. Webber’s article, Shane from NZ wrote the following comment, which was one of eight comments out of over 600 that was flagged:

Surely the problem lies with corporate law, are they not required to consider and act only on those ideas that increase shareholder’s returns? Of course presumably they wrote the laws themselves. One can complain….I assume they then disingenuously shrug and point to that mandated and outrageously myopic requirement.

But… as Lynn Stout, the distinguished professor of corporate and business law at Cornell Law School, who is the author of “The Shareholder Value Myth: How Putting Shareholders First Harms Investors, Corporations, and the Public” wrote in an op ed column three years ago in the very same NYTimes this is FALSE!

I attempted to correct this misinformation as a reply, but the comment section is closed which meant I could not make the correction. As I noted in my missive to the Times, this needs to be corrected because every time it is repeated it gains veracity. But who knows, maybe the Times editors believe it IS true because it has been repeated so frequently by business talking heads that most of the public believes it.

But here’s the real story bout pensions and corporations: they don’t want to pay them for their own employees, they don’t support the legislators who try to responsibly underwrite the pensions pledged to public sector employees, and they want to spread the DIS-information that the problem can’t be fixed. I daresay the problem could be immediately fixed by raising the share of taxes on affluent wage earners to the levels that were in place in the Eisenhower administration— or maybe even those in place in the Reagan administration. But sh-h-h-h! Don’t let THAT news get out.


%d bloggers like this: