Uber's Questionable Ethics

Uber's senior vice president of business Emil Michael made a mess for the company. At a dinner in NYC, Michael suggested paying $1 million to research information about members of the media: "your personal lives, your families." Michael's comments were directed particularly to Sarah Lacy, who wrote a scathing article about sexism and misogyny at Uber. BuzzFeed notes that this comment comes on the heels of Uber's commitment to improve its image and relations with the media.

A BloombergBusinessweek article notes Uber's history of retaliating against people who speak against it. Although later reinstated, a driver's account was deactivated after he posted a negative tweet about the service.

In a statement through his publicist, Michael, who said he thought his remarks were off the record, apologized:

"The remarks attributed to me at a private dinner-borne out of frustration during an informal debate over what I feel is sensationalistic media coverage of the company I am proud to work for-do not reflect my actual views and have no relation to the company's views or approach. They were wrong no matter the circumstance and I regret them."

In 13 tweets, Uber CEO Travis Kalanick explained the company's position.

Tweet 14 apologized to Sarah Lacy.

Uber's head of communication also weighed in via Twitter: "We have not, do not and will not investigate journalists. Those remarks have no basis in the reality of our approach."

Discussion Starters:

• Was it unrealistic for Michael to consider his comments at a dinner "off the record," or did the journalist at the table act inappropriately?
• What should Uber do to regain trust?
• Should Michael be fired?

Ads Encourage Risky and Unhealthy Behavior

A new study showed that people who read promotions about diet aids ate more.

To be published in The Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, the study exposed people to two versions of messages. Both groups read a warning about high-fat diets, but one group read this additional text: "Until now! Introducing Chitosan Rx Ultra," a weight-loss aid "capable of absorbing up to 60 percent of the fat in your food." When given a plate of cookies, people who saw the message about Chitosan took significantly more cookies, and some took all 30.

The study authors conclude, "Why make healthier food choices to manage weight if a weight-management drug can manage your weight for you?" In a related study, participants exposed to ads for debt consolidation made riskier financial decisions.

Calling something a "supplement" didn't have as drastic results as calling something a "drug." One of the authors explains the distinction: "With the supplement, the very name reminds you that this is supplemental to other health protective behavior. They think [losing weight] is something they have to do as well … but people believe that the drug alone will take care of the problem."

Image source.

Discussion Starters:

• What, if any, responsibility do diet drug companies have in advertising?
• The Bureau of Consumer Protection published a website to help people spot false claims of weight loss products. How useful do you find the site?

Arguments over a $3,750 Bottle of Wine

When a diner at Bobbie Flay Steak at the Borgata in Atlantic City heard the price of a wine, he thought it was $37.50, not $3,570. The host asked Joe Lentini to order a bottle, and here's how he explained the situation to NJ.com: 

"I asked the waitress if she could recommend something decent because I don't have experience with wine. She pointed to a bottle on the menu. I didn't have my glasses. I asked how much and she said, 'Thirty-seven fifty.'"

Lentini then tasted the Screaming Eagle, Oakville 2011, from the sommelier: "It was okay. It was good. It wasn't great. It wasn't terrible. It was fine."

Borgata executive vice president Joseph Lupo insists that protocol was followed:

"As the leading culinary destination in this region, we consistently serve as many, if not more high-end wine and spirits without incident. In this isolated case, both the server and sommelier verified the bottle requested with the patron."

Lupo also said:

"Due to these factors along with very detailed accounts from multiple sources regarding the incident, Borgata is confident there was no misunderstanding regarding the selection. We simply will not allow the threat of a negative story that includes so many unaccounted and questionable statements to disparage our integrity and standards, which Borgata takes great pride in practicing every day."

The wine list shows wines in the hundreds but plenty in the $30 - $50 range too. The Screaming Eagle was by far one of the most expensive wines in the restaurant.

Discussion Starters:

• Some believe the server should be held responsible. What do you think? Does seeing the wine list influence your thinking?
• What should guests do to avoid this situation? What should servers do?

How Not to Respond to a Negative Review

Taking a page from Amy's Baking Company, a Cleveland restaurant owner attacked a reviewer. The guest posted a detailed, negative review on Yelp.

Ninja Kitchen and Bar Chef Bac Nguyen didn't appreciate the comments. He found the guest's phone number and texted him. In a series of insulting messages, Bac Nguyen threatened him, disparaged his friend, insulted him, and called him names. Read the texts (NSFW).

Business owners are under tremendous pressure to deal with negative reviews. When a review is deemed reasonable, like this one, we expect the chef of a restaurant to issue a gracious response-perhaps a lot to ask of someone so invested in the food.

Discussion Starters:

• Compare this chef's response to that of Voltaire's owner. What differences and similarities do you see in the initial reviews and the responses?
• Draft a Yelp response for Chef Bac Nguyen. Consider something that would be intentionally public.
• What other advice would you give Chef Bac Nguyen about customer service and business communication?

Restaurant Owner Disputes Yelp Review

The owner of Voltaire, a Kansas City restaurant, didn't accept a critical Yelp Review. The reviewer and her lawyer-husband were busy in a meeting across the street, and Voltaire refused to package the food "to-go" for someone to pick up.

On Yelp, the reviewer gave Voltaire one star and explained the restaurant's refusal, beginning with the line, "Most unfriendly and arrogant restaurant in KC." In the owner's response, he confirmed that they don't offer take-out:

"I sincerely apologize that we don't offer "take-out" food at our restaurant. Being a Yelp user, I'm sure you were aware that on our Yelp business page, on the right side of the screen, it lists details about our establishment. There is an item listed "Take-Out : No." We have never offered take-out food as we believe the food we prepare should be presented as we see fit, (usually) on a plate inside the dining room."

The owner went on to draw an analogy between not offering take-out and not providing divorce assistance when one is a tax lawyer.

Although Voltaire reviews on Yelp are generally positive (4 out of 5 stars), a few comments may indicate other issues, such as this 2-star review:

"I'm mixed on Voltaire.

'The good: the food and drinks are incredible. Good enough to earn them back a star after a really unfortunate experience.

"The bad: the staff knows the food and drinks are good, but behave like that grants them a licence for difficult behavior. . . ."

Discussion Starters:

• Read the entire original review and the owner's response. Based on this exchange, did the owner handle the situation well?
• Even if you agree with the approach, what, if any, missteps did the restaurant make with this customer?
• Is the lawyer analogy effective? What makes an analogy false?
• What about the adage, "The customer's always right?" Has social media changed this?
• What's the customers' responsibility? How, if at all, did they act inappropriately?

Uber Promotes Rides from "Hot Chicks"

As the ride-sharing service Uber tries to make inroads into France, BuzzFeed criticized one of its promotions. Through an app called "Avions de Chasse," Uber promised a free, 20-minute ride with a model. The promotion is explained on the Avions de Chasse website:

"Avions de chasse" is the French term for "fighter jets," but also the colloquial term to designate an incredibly hot chick. Lucky you! the world's most beautiful "Avions" are waiting for you on this app. Seat back, relax and let them take you on cloud 9!

The website also shows provocative photos of women. 

Uber Lyon has withdrawn the promotion and announced the decision on Twitter.

The company also sent a statement to Huffington Post:

"We have decided to cancel the operation immediately, not having clearly assessed the situation, we sincerely apologize to the people who might have been offended."

Discussion Starters:

• Assess Uber's apology. What works well, and what could be improved?
• One website accusses BuzzFeed of "harassing" Uber about the campaign. First, what is "harassment," and is this an appropriate term in this situation? Second, what's your view: Is it appropriate to criticize the campaign or not?

Walmart Worsens Healthcare PR

Blaming health care costs, Walmart is cancelling healthcare insurance for about 30,000 part-time employees who work fewer than 30 hours per week. The news is bad enough, but the company exacerbated the negative press with a tweet Huffington Post calls "bizarre and ill timed."

Walmart employees protested this decision and the 19% increase in premiums that workers will pay under Walmart's new plans. Under anonymity, a Mississippi employee told Business Insider, "Most of the employees where I work are struggling as it is, and to take away more of the very meager benefits we get is atrocious." An employee in Missouri said, "While this is a cost cutting [move] for Wal-Mart, is it a slam in the face for employees. Just another thing they are taking away from them." She is worried about coworkers "barely - and I mean barely - keeping their heads above water, even after working for Wal-Mart for almost 20 years."

Sally Welborn, Walmart's senior vice president of benefits, told reporters that Home Depot and Target also recently cut part-timers' benefits: "Health care costs just keep going up for all of us." The decision also is explained in a blog post. However, this tweet provided no context and seemed odd, given the news about cuts and increased costs, neither of which are reflected in this chart:

Discussion Starters:

• Read Walmart's blog post. Which are the most and least convincing arguments?
• In what ways do you support employees' perspectives?
• PR Daily's Matt Wilson summarizes the tweet situation: "Sometimes, Twitter just isn't the right medium for complex communications." Wilson also tells us that the tweet didn't link to the blog post, which provides more context. What advice would you give Walmart as the company considers tweeting after a report of bad news?

SeaWorld Twitter Fail

SeaWorld's PR team may be too optimistic. Why would they think this promotional tweet would turn out differently?

Has SeaWorld not yet understood how inextricably the company is associated with orca whale  captivity? The response tweets, such as this one, shamed SeaWord for its attempt to associate with saving whales: "@SeaWorld Those wild caught beluga calves you are trying to import - how did they get captured? Did they volunteer and jump into the nets?" (Louise ‏@MissBrightside9 Sep 15.)

Other tweets reflected similar sentiment:

Discussion Starters:

• Should SeaWorld have known better than to promote this tweet, or am I too harsh? Maybe people should move on and accept that the company is trying to turn around?
• Imagine that you're a consultant for SeaWorld. What types of tweets would you recommend they post to try to rebuild the brand?
• Sam Berg, one of SeaWorld's former trainers interviewed in the movie Blackfish, said that possibly only one of the current whales at the park would be successful in the wild. Should people stop using the hashtag #emptythetanks?

Urban Outfitters Offends Again

What could be wrong with selling a blood-splatter-patterned sweatshirt? Urban Outfitters has apologized for putting up for a sale a "vintage" shirt with the Kent State logo. If you missed the history lesson, four students were shot in 1970 at Kent State during a political protest.

Urban Outfitters issued this apology:

"Urban Outfitters sincerely apologizes for any offense our Vintage Kent State Sweatshirt may have caused. It was never our intention to allude to the tragic events that took place at Kent State in 1970 and we are extremely saddened that this item was perceived as such. The one-of-a-kind item was purchased as part of our sun-faded vintage collection. There is no blood on this shirt nor has this item been altered in any way. The red stains are discoloration from the original shade of the shirt and the holes are from natural wear and fray. Again, we deeply regret that this item was perceived negatively and we have removed it immediately from our website to avoid further upset."

Kent State weighed into the controversy as well:

This isn't the first time Urban Outfitters introduced an offensive product. The Week chronicled 12 more. 

Discussion Starters:

• Is Urban Outfitters intentionally offending? What are the advantages and disadvantages of this advertising strategy?
  
• Assess the company's response. Does it meet criteria for an effective apology?
• Discuss Kent State's response. Do you think it was wise for the university to weigh in? Why would administrators issue a statement, and what could be the consequences?

NLRB Ruling on "Likes"

The National Labor Relations Board has ruled on another social media case in which employees were terminated for posting about their employer in social media. In this case, the NLRB upheld the court decision that Triple Play Sports Bar and Grille wrongfully terminated two employees.

The employees had responded to this Facebook post by a former employee:

"Maybe someone should do the owners of Triple Play a favor and buy it from them. They can't even do the tax paperwork correctly!!! Now I OWE money…Wtf!!!"

One current employee "liked" the post and another commented, "I owe too.  Such an a**hole." Both were fired. 

The NLRB protects employees' rights to concerted activity, meaning they can discuss issues, such as pay and working conditions, with other employees. "Mere griping" or simply bad-mouthing an employer or customers typically is not protected.

What's significant about this case is it's the first NLRB ruling that addresses and protects simply "liking" a post.

The NLRB also ruled that Triple Play's Internet/blogging policy was too broad. Employers cannot prevent employees from making any negative comments about a company online.

Discussion Starters:

• Research other cases when the the NLRB has ruled for or against an employer when an employee has posted online. What themes emerge?
• Why do you think "concerted activity" is protected? What does that mean?

Racist Email Causes Hawks Owner to Sell

An email from Atlanta Hawks owner Bruce Levenson surfaced after a related investigation, causing him to sell his controlling stake in the team. The email is an assessment of operations written to General Manager Danny Ferry, and it includes pointed comments about the numbers of black people at games:

"Before we bought the hawks and for those couple years immediately after in an effort to make the arena look full (at the nba's urging) thousands and thousands of tickets were being giving away, predominantly in the black community, adding to the overwhelming black audience.

"My theory is that the black crowd scared away the whites and there are simply not enough affluent black fans to build a signficant season ticket base. Please dont get me wrong. There was nothing threatening going on in the arean back then. i never felt uncomfortable, but i think southern whites simply were not comfortable being in an arena or at a bar where they were in the minority. On fan sites i would read comments about how dangerous it is around philips yet in our 9 years, i don't know of a mugging or even a pick pocket incident. This was just racist garbage. When I hear some people saying the arena is in the wrong place I think it is code for there are too many blacks at the games.

"I have been open with our executive team about these concerns. I have told them I want some white cheerleaders and while i don't care what the color of the artist is, i want the music to be music familiar to a 40 year old white guy if that's our season tixs demo. i have also balked when every fan picked out of crowd to shoot shots in some time out contest is black. . . ."

Levenson is particularly criticized because he was so adamant that Donald Sterling should sell his stake in the team after he made racial comments, which were audio taped by his girlfriend. At the time, Levenson said, "I think I speak for all of my partners when I say we were all deeply offended. We all quickly spoke out against the words we heard on that tape."

Levenson apologized in a statement posted on the Hawks' website: 

"I trivialized our fans by making clichéd assumptions about their interests (i.e. hip hop vs. country, white vs. black cheerleaders, etc.) and by stereotyping their perceptions of one another (i.e. that white fans might be afraid of our black fans). By focusing on race, I also sent the unintentional and hurtful message that our white fans are more valuable than our black fans."

Additional statements were posted from CEO Steve Koonin and NBA Commissioner Adam Silver. Read Silver's full statement.

Download Bruce Levenson's email.

Discussion Starters:

• Why would Levenson make such comments in an email? What assumptions did he make? 
• Should Levenson have sold his stake when Donald Sterling sold his, back in May?

Malaysia Airlines' "Bucket List" Promotion

Twitter users were out in force, criticizing Malaysia Airlines' poorly named "My Ultimate Bucket List Campaign." The promotion asks people, "What and where would you to tick off your to-do list, and explain why?" [sic]

A bucket list is commonly known as the activities people want to accomplish before they die or "kick the bucket." Within one year, Malaysia Airlines lost two planes and 537 lives.

In response to criticism, the company changed the name of the promotion to "Win an iPad or Malaysia Airlines flight to Malaysia."

The company also issued this statement:

"Malaysia Airlines has withdrawn the title of a competition running in Australia and New Zealand, as it is found to be inappropriate at this point in time. The competition had been earlier approved as it was themed around a common phrase used in both countries. The airline appreciates and respects the sentiments of the public and in no way did it intend to offend any parties."

Discussion Starters: 

• Did the airline do the right thing by changing the name, or are people just too sensitive?
• What does "sic" mean, which I wrote in the first paragraph?
• Assess the airlines' apology. What rules of social media and apologies does it follow, and what could be improved?

Zara Apologizes for Concentration Camp Shirt

Retailer Zara has pulled a shirt that many said looked like Holocaust attire. Promoted as a "striped 'sheriff' t-shirt," the product reminded people of the Star of David and stripes (although they were vertical) worn by Jewish prisoners in concentration camps.

The company apologized in a tweet: "We honestly apologize, it was inspired by the sheriff's stars from the Classic Western films and is no longer in our stores."

Inditex, Zara's parent company, also posted a news article to provide background and apologize:

Zara Kids has removed a children's t-shirt from its stores and website. The t-shirt withdrawn was inspired by the classic American Westerns and has been taken out of circulation due to the potential similarity with the Star of David that has been used as a yellow star patch. Zara has issued a heartfelt apology on its social network profiles.

The garment was available only for just a few hours and sales of the t-shirt have been marginal. The items will be reliably destroyed.

Inditex would like to reiterate its utmost respect for all cultures and religions. The Group is a Company where people from 180 nationalities work together representing all the cultures, races and religions of the modern world. Inditex is proud of its cultural diversity. In addition, respect and dignity feature among the principles which guide and define its corporate values. The Group condemns and rejects any form of discrimination.

This isn't the first time Zara used Nazi-reminiscent images. In 2007, Zara pulled a handbag with swastikas, which the company says were made in Asia, where the image has a different cultural significance.

Discussion Starters:

• Do you believe that the shirt was an innocent mistake? Why or why not?
• Assess the parent company's message. How well does it rebuild the brand image?
• Does this news affect your decision to shop at Zara?

Real Estate Company Apologizes for Inappropriate Email

Real estate website ListedBy.com sent an email to alert its customers that Robin Williams died. Several people thought the announcement was inappropriate and told the firm so.

The situation reminds me of small business advisor who used Amy Winehouse's death to promote her services. Although ListedBy.com was a bit more subtle, the email still feels like an opportunity to connect with prospective customers. Using a death for this purpose just seems wrong.

To its credit, the company sent a nice apology:

Members,

I wanted to run in to the office even at this late hour and make sure we issue a prompt apology. Earlier tonight we sent out our wkly newsletter including the news of Robin Williams death. We used our same newsletter template we always use for sending out breaking news and while it was potentially a vocal minority we did receive a couple dozen emails that felt it was simply not tasteful and not our place to send out an email like this.

In hindsight we completely agree and understand why this was not a good idea to send and we want to issue our most sincere apology to all our members and anyone who was in any way offended by this.

It was simply an issue of us ourselves as human beings receiving the news about half an hour before we were trying to select the "news of the day" to send out to our members, and being that we were sincerely extreme Robin Williams fans it seemed like there was no news we could think of that was more important than this. In hindsight again though we realize we actually could have negatively represented the man we intended to honor and for that we are very sorry. It again was a very fast paced decision from someone that really was shocked by the news and we hope you as members forgive us if this was in bad taste. As an extra part of our apology and to try to accomplish our initial goal of honoring a great person who was such a big part of American culture for so long we will be making a donation this week to his charitable foundation. Thanks again for your understanding our human flaw on this send and from now on we'll just stick to real estate when it comes to reporting the news!

Sincerely,

The ListedBy.com Team

Discussion Starters:

• Assess the apology: What works well, and what could be improved?
• Edit the apology: Help the CEO (or whoever wrote it) punctuate properly.

Fake Facebook Accounts of MH17 Victims

If the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 and the looting of victims' belongings at the crash site didn't depress you enough, here's more news. Several fake Facebook pages were set up in the names of Australian victims of the crash.

Among the accounts were three pages created in the names of children who died in the crash. When clicked, video images open external pop-up ads for gambling, sex, and counterfeit drug sites.

Although early reports said Facebook wasn't taking action and couldn't until the sites were proven illegal, the company has since taken them down. A Facebook spokesperson said, "We are disabling these profiles as soon as we are made aware of them. We encourage people to block those responsible and report suspicious behaviour to our team of experts via our reporting buttons so that we can quickly take the appropriate action."

Image source.

Discussion Starters:

• What are the potential consequences of Facebook's decision to remove these pages? Why would the company not act immediately?
• If the creators of these pages were caught, what would be appropriate action against them?

NPR Tweets DO Reflect on the Organization

A National Public Radio employee got her hand slapped after tweeting from @npr_ed (NPR's Education Team):

Anya Kamenetz apologized, saying that her tweets don't reflect on the public radio station. But NPR executives don't agree. In response, NPR Standards & Practices supervising editor sent this email to employees:

From: Mark Memmott
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2014 2:24 PM
To: News-All Staff
Subject: Reminder: There Is No Privacy On The Web, And ‘Personal' Pages Are Not Safe Zones

"If you wouldn't say it on the air, don't say it on the Web."

That's been the basic guidance for quite a few years.

In reality, Twitter and other social media sites allow us to show more of our personalities than we might on the air or in a blog post.

BUT, though the words may be on "personal" Twitter or Facebook accounts, what we say can reflect on NPR and raise questions about our ability to be objective.

Matt Thompson offers a test. Before posting something about your work or a news event or an issue, even if you're putting it on what you think of as a personal page, ask this question: "Is it helping my journalism, or is it hurting my journalism?"

Here's a bit more from the Ethics Handbook:

"We acknowledge that nothing on the Web is truly private. Even on purely recreational or cultural sites and even if what we're doing is personal and not identified as coming from someone at NPR, we understand that what we say and do could still reflect on NPR. So we do nothing that could undermine our credibility with the public, damage NPR's standing as an impartial source of news, or otherwise jeopardize NPR's reputation. In other words, we don't behave any differently than we would in any public setting or on an NPR broadcast."

Also, despite what many say, retweets should be viewed AS endorsements. Again, from the handbook:

"Tweet and retweet as if what you're saying or passing along is information that you would put on the air or in a ‘traditional' NPR.org news story. If it needs context, attribution, clarification or ‘knocking down,' provide it."

The email provides sound advice for people representing the organization, perhaps even when they're not representing the organization. 

Discussion Starters:

• PR Daily asks readers good questions for business communication students: "Do tweets, even from personal accounts, reflect on employers? Do retweets equal endorsements?"
• @NPR is another Twitter handle, but there are no tweets about this incident. Should the account holder have written something? If so, what?

Google Intercepted a Goldman Email

A Goldman Sachs contractor accidentally sent a confidential email to a Gmail address instead of the "GS.com" domain. Unlike most of us who have mistyped an address (and who hasn't), the contractor, client, and company will suffer no humiliation.

Goldman asked Google to intercept the email. The appeal to Google was simply that it's an easy action for Google to take compared to the potential damage of the client's data being revealed. (I'm nosy: Who's the client, and just how much are we talking about?)

Google complied with the court order, and it's a happy ending, sort-of. Critics say Goldman's legal machine made this happen, and some wonder whether we could see a legal precedent, but this is unlikely because Google didn't fight the request, so there's no court decision to ponder.

Goldman Sachs v. Google

Discussion Starters:

• Did Google do the right thing? What are the potential pros and cons of the company's decision to comply with Goldman's request?
• What are the potential implications of this situation?

Claim Against KFC Was a Hoax

Kelly Mullins wrote a sad story on Facebook about how her granddaughter, Victoria, was shunned at a Jackson, Mississippi KFC. The little girl was attacked by three pit bulls, which left her with scarring and a bandage on her face. The grandmother claimed that Victoria was asked to leave the KFC while eating: "We have to ask you to leave because her face is disrupting our customers."

As you can imagine, the response on Facebook and other social media sites was enormous, and news outlets were all over the story. KFC gave the family $30,000 for medical bills and issued this statement:

"KFC launched an investigation as soon as we were made aware of this report. We take this very seriously, as we have zero tolerance for any kind of hurtful or disrespectful actions toward our guests. Our investigation is ongoing, but we have been in touch with the family and are committed to doing something appropriate for this beautiful little girl and her family. We will also work with the franchisee to take appropriate action at the restaurant once the specifics of the incident are determined."

But the story didn't stack up. The family said they ordered mashed potatoes and iced tea, but there were no such orders that day, and the restaurant video showed no record of Victoria and her grandmother entering the building.

Discussion Starters:

• Let's put the grandparenting question aside because I don't want to judge(!). What about the responsibility of reporters? Huffington Post, CNN, and others reported the story with only the grandmother's evidence.
• Should KFC ask for the $30,000 back? Should the company press criminal charges?
• The family raised an additional $135,000 for the girl as a result of this publicity. Should they be forced to return the donations?

Board Terminates RadiumOne CEO After Felony Charges

Former RadiumOne CEO and Founder Gurbaksh Chahal is disputing his termination. The board of directors may have supported Chahal as he was charged with assaulting his girlfriend and plead guilty to two misdemeanors. But after more reporting and social media activity, apparently, the board made its decision.

RadiumOne, an advertising platform, announced the termination in a short press statement on its website:

"At a board meeting yesterday evening, RadiumOne's board of directors voted to terminate the employment of Gurbaksh Chahal as CEO and Chairman of the company. Bill Lonergan, the company's COO, will take over as CEO of the Company immediately. Bill has an extraordinary professional background and has helped build BlueLithium and RadiumOne into industry leading brands. We are confident he will continue Radium One's impressive trajectory."

In a blog post, "Can You Handle the Truth?" Chahal admits to losing his temper but denies claims that he hit his girlfriend 117 times. He also protests the media attention and social media attacks. Chahal includes an email he says he received from one of his board members two days before he was terminated:

"Been thinking some more. Absolutely don't do anything. Let the haters hate ad move on. This will blow over very quickly and we focus on the IPO.  Don't let them get to you. Don't respond.  I know it sucks but i think this is the right way fwd.  Stay strong amigo. I feel for you."

In the meantime, at least two reporters had called for the board to terminate Chahal: Kara Swisher and CNN Money writer Dan Primack.

Image source.

Discussion Starters:

• Did the board make the right decision? Why or why not? What does one's personal life have to do with the business? Does his position as CEO and/or founder affect your view?
• How do you assess the email Chahal posted? If it's real, does it help his case?
• How, if at all, does the image of Chahal with President Obama affect your opinion of him?

South Korea Prime Minister Apologizes and Resigns

South Korea Prime Minister Chung Hong-won has resigned, taking responsibility for issues associated with the ferry that sank. More than 300 people died, mostly high school students. In his resignation speech, the PM said that resigning was "the right thing to do" and apologized for "many problems, from the prevention of the accident to the early handling of the accident (BBC translation)." Initially, families were told that everyone had been rescued.

Critics say that the prime minister is a figure head and that President Park Geun-hye should take the fall. The opposing party called the resignation a "cowardly evasion of responsibility" and called for the president to apologize.

A professor of political science and diplomacy at Myongji University in Seoul said the incident will not likely affect the upcoming election in June. Shin Yul said that the resignation "may tip the scales a bit, but in terms of the elections, this incident has been unfavorable to both parties because voters are angry with all public figures."

Discussion Starters:

• What's your view of the resignation? Was it the right thing to do, only a symbolic gesture, an act of scapegoating, or something else?
• As you might expect, President Park Geun-hye accepted Chun's apology. What else, if anything, should she do?