Brian Williams: "I Said Things That Were Wrong"

Brian Williams will be replaced as NBC news anchor following an investigation into his reporting. In an interview with Matt Lauer, Williams admitted stretching the truth in some cases:

"It had to have been ego that made me think I had to be sharper, funnier, quicker than anybody else. Put myself closer to the action, having been at the action in the beginning." 

He said he didn't intend to mislead viewers:

"I told stories that were wrong. It was not from a place where I was trying to use my job and title to mislead...I got it wrong. I own this. And I own up to this."  

NBC announced the decision and Williams' replacement, Lester Holt, on its website. The company included a quotation from Steve Burke, CEO of NBCU, expressing confidence in Williams' future career at MSNBC: 

"As you would imagine this was a difficult decision. Brian Williams has been with NBC News for a very long time and he has covered countless news events with honor and skill. As I said in February, we believe in second chances, and I am hopeful that this new beginning will be good for Brian and the organization. This matter has been extensively analyzed and deliberated on by NBC. We are moving forward."

In that news announcement, Williams offered this apology: 

"I'm sorry. I said things that weren't true. I let down my NBC colleagues and our viewers, and I'm determined to earn back their trust. I will greatly miss working with the team on Nightly News, but I know the broadcast will be in excellent hands with Lester Holt as anchor. I will support him 100% as he has always supported me. I am grateful for the chance to return to covering the news. My new role will allow me to focus on important issues and events in our country and around the world, and I look forward to it."

Discussion Starters: 

• Are you surprised at the decision after reading the news? Why did NBC executives move Williams to MSNBC rather than terminate his contract? 
• How well did Williams handle the apology? What else, if anything, should he say at this point? 

Organic Farmers Displeased with Whole Foods

Whole Foods needs to complete with traditional grocery stores, which are offering more organic items. Arguably, Whole Foods created the market, but stores such as Costco, which sold $4 billion of organic foods in 2014, are increasing their food selection and offer lower prices and one-stop-shopping.

Responsibly Grown is the company's new strategy of labeling foods "good," "better," or "best." 

Although Whole Foods claims to "Reward farmers who work hard to protect human health and the environment," organic farmers say they will no longer benefit from having a federal certified organic designation. According to an organic farmer quoted in The New York Times, "Becoming organic is a big investment of time and money. This ratings system kind of devalues all that - if you can get a ‘best' rating as a conventional farmer using pesticides and other toxic substances, why would you grow organically?"

According to The New York Times, the lines are increasing blurred: 

"Conventional growers can receive higher rankings than organic farmers by doing things like establishing a garbage recycling program, relying more on alternative energy sources, eliminating some pesticides and setting aside a portion of fields as a conservation area."

Matt Rogers, associate global produce coordinator at Whole Foods, says the program gives consumers more choice and encourages conventional farmers to move toward the organic standard, which currently doesn't include "water, waste, energy, farmworker welfare."

Discussion Starters: 

• Do you consider Whole Foods' new rating system ethical? Use the Guidelines for Ethical Decision Making in Chapter 1 to form your opinion. 
• What's your view of the Responsibly Grown program? Do you tend to side with Whole Foods' or the farmers' perspective?

FIFA President Announces Resignation

As the FIFA corruption scandal continues, the soccer organization's president was re-elected for a fifth term but then resigned. Although he wasn't one of the officials arrested, Sepp Blatter will be the focus of the U.S. investigation. The strategy is to pressure those indicted to reveal wrongdoing at the most senior levels in the organization. 

In a resignation speech, which The New York Times reports was given to "a mostly empty room at FIFA headquarters," Blatter explained his decision: 

"While I have a mandate from the membership of FIFA, I do not feel that I have a mandate from the entire world of football-the fans, the players, the clubs, the people who live, breathe and love football as much as we all do at FIFA."

Blatt leaves after serving 17 years at the organization. 

On its website, FIFA quoted Blatt about "reform work."

"I had a good, constructive meeting with Mr. Scala to establish a framework for action and a timetable. I am pleased to take advice and guidance from Mr. Scala. I want a comprehensive programme of reform and I am very aware that only the FIFA Congress can pass these reforms. Furthermore, the Executive Committee has a particular duty to share the responsibility of driving this process."

Discussion Starters: 

• Did Blatt make the right decision? Why would he run for re-election and then resign shortly after getting the job for a fifth term? 
• What else should FIFA communicate at this point? How can the organization repair its image throughout the world?

World Cup Sponsors Respond to Qatar Controversy

PR Daily has gathered statements from corporate sponsors Visa, Coca-Cola, and Adidas about the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. Reports of worker abuse and deaths and the detention of BBC journalists have sparked controversy about Qatar as FIFA's choice for the event. The International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) has urged sponsor to speak out. 

Visa was the first company to get FIFA's attention: 

 "We continue to be troubled by the reports coming out of Qatar related to the World Cup and migrant worker conditions. We have expressed our grave concern to FIFA and urge them to take all necessary actions to work with the appropriate authorities and organisations to remedy this situation and ensure the health and safety of all involved."

In response, FIFA issued this statement: 

"FIFA has repeatedly urged publicly and with the highest authorities in Qatar that fair working conditions for all workers in Qatar are imperative.

"Migrant workers have been working for many global companies in Qatar for decades, yet only now is real change happening in their working conditions.

"While there are huge construction programs under way in Qatar that have no connection to the FIFA World Cup, it is clear that the FIFA World Cup is serving as a catalyst for significant change.

"FIFA, alongside trade unions and human rights organisations, will continue to urge the Qatari authorities to accomplish reforms and abolish the Kafala system. Ultimately, however, sustainable change in the whole country can only be reached in a collective effort with all stakeholders involved, including international companies and governments."

The Qatari government issued a statement about detaining BBC reporters: 

"The Government Communications Office invited a dozen reporters to see-first-hand-some sub-standard labour accommodation as well as some of the newer labour villages. We gave the reporters free rein to interview whomever they chose and to roam unaccompanied in the labour villages.

"Perhaps anticipating that the government would not provide this sort of access, the BBC crew decided to do their own site visits and interviews in the days leading up to the planned tour. In doing so, they trespassed on private property, which is against the law in Qatar just as it is in most countries. Security forces were called and the BBC crew was detained."

The BBC expressed its dissatisfaction with the response: 

"We are pleased that the BBC team has been released but we deplore the fact that they were detained in the first place. Their presence in Qatar was no secret and they were engaged in a perfectly proper piece of journalism.

"The Qatari authorities have made a series of conflicting allegations to justify the detention, all of which the team rejects. We are pressing the Qatari authorities for a full explanation and for the return of the confiscated equipment."

Image source. 

Discussion Starters: 

• Read additional statements from Adidas and Coca-Cola. What else, if anything, should these companies say? 
• Should the sponsors pull their support of the Word Cup 2022? 
• What should FIFA do at this point? 

Twitter Has More Work to Do

Twitter CEO Dick Costolo's promise to "take full responsibility" for hate and bullying on the site doesn't seem to be working. President Obama's @POTUS Twitter account received terrible threats and insults within just a few minutes of his first post. 

In February, Costolo posted an internal message to employees, which included the following: 

"We're going to start kicking these people off right and left, and making sure that when they issue their ridiculous attacks, nobody hears them."

Unfortunately, the company fell far short this week. The President's new Twitter account, which garnered 2.3 million followers in four days, received 500 "f-bombs" on the first day, according to The Washington Post. The Post also warned that tweets to @POTUS are archived forever. Maybe someday, users will regret posting despicable images of the President with a noose around his neck, for example.  

Discussion Starters: 

• Why do you think the President chose to start a Twitter account now, six years into office? 
• Was this the right decision? Consider the benefits of having an account, the obvious downsides of the backlash, and perhaps less obvious issues. 
• Some hateful tweets are promoted on Twitter. Should the company do more? Like what? 

Welsh Bus Company Rethinks Sexy Ad

Are people just too sensitive, or did this Welsh bus company cross a line with its ad? The picture of a naked woman with a provocative line was created for a Cardiff, Wales, company promoting its cross-city service.

A representative for the Advertising Standards Agency reported 45 complaints and told Business Insider, "We've received complaints about this ad, but we understand that the advertiser will be taking it down within the next 24 hours and has removed its accompanying tweet in response to the concerns it's received. We'll continue to monitor the situation in case further action is needed."

On Twitter, New Adventure Travel promised to take down the ads: 

In view of the reaction to our bus advertising today we wish to set out our position:

Firstly we have stated that our objectives have been to make catching the bus attractive to the younger generation. We therefore developed an internal advertising campaign featuring males and females to hold boards to promote the cost of our daily tickets.

The slogan of 'ride me all day for £3' whilst being a little tongue in cheek was in no way intended to cause offence to either men or women and, if the advert has done so then we apologise unreservedly. There has certainly been no intention to objectify either men or women.

Given the volume of negativity received we have decided to remove the pictures from the back of the buses within the next twenty four hours.

Discussion Starters: 

• What's your view? Is this just a catchy ad and people are too sensitive? Or is the ad potentially offensive?
• What, if any, cultural differences are at play? How do you think this would be received in the United States?
• How do we decide what "crosses a line"? What criteria do you use to form your opinion? 
• Did New Adventure Travel do and say the right thing?

Barbie Won't Associate with SeaWorld

Barbie, whose bones are attached with only moral fiber, has finally ended her agreement with SeaWorld. She will no longer be a SeaWorld trainer.

Mattel doesn't say why, but we can speculate that negative press about the theme park's treatment of orca whales, exposed by the movie Blackfish, is part of the reason.

Alex Clark, a Mattel spokesperson told NBC, "We're not making the doll anymore. Consumers may find it on retail shelves but we are not shipping and not producing the doll." About the decision, Clark said only, "A number of factors go into a decision like that. Their licensing deal expired and we've elected not to renew it."

Image source. 

Discussion Starters:

• Is discontinuing SeaWorld Trainer Barbie the right decision for Mattel even if the doll has been profitable? 
• Should Mattel say more about the reason? What factors would management consider in communicating the decision?

An AT&T President Fired Over Racist Text

One of AT&T's presidents has been fired for sending a racist tweet, and other executives may be involved. Aaron Slator sent offensive images that became public in a $100 million lawsuit filed by an AT&T employee.

The complaint blames a culture of racism at the company: 

"These images, put out by Slator who is the President of AT&T, are beyond offensive. When Slator sent the picture of the African child via text message, he referred to it as an 'oldie but goodie.' Slator transmitted these images on his work phone, evidencing deep-rooted racial bigotry in his place of employment."

Knoyme King is claiming that she was denied a promotional opportunity, was unfairly paid, and suffered a hostile work environment. 

AT&T has terminated Slator, which King's attorneys equate with admitting guilt. 

A spokesperson for AT&T told Business Insider, "Aaron Slator has been terminated. There is no place for demeaning behavior within AT&T, and we regret the action was not taken earlier."

Image source.

Discussion Starters: 

• Was terminating Slator the right decision? Do you agree with the lawyers that this proves AT&T's guilt?
• I'm trying to understand Slator's position? What could be his defense?

Bud Light Regrets "Up for Whatever" Campaign

Bud Light bottle

Bud Light wants to attract the female demographic, but its latest campaign isn't winning any friends. In a campaign, "Up for Whatever," the beer company seems to be promoting bad behavior. A new bottle label reads, "The perfect beer for removing ‘no' from your vocabulary for the night."

This isn't the first time the campaign was criticized. A New York Times article gives some history: 

And in March, Bud Light was forced to take down a post on Twitter that appeared to promote some type of sexual harassment: ‘On #StPatricksDay, you can pinch people who don't wear green. You can also pinch people who aren't #UpForWhatever.”

This time, Bud Light seems to regret the label choice. In a statement posted on its website, the company promises to stop production: 

Bud Light removal

Image source. 

Discussion Starters: 

• What's your view of the campaign? Bud Light calls is "lighthearted." Do you agree? 

• Should the company have learned after the St. Patrick's Day tweet? Why do you think the bottle labeling continued after that criticism?

• Is stopping bottle production the right decision? Should the company also pull existing bottles from shelves?

Brian Williams May Get a Big Payout

Brian Williams isn't going away quietly. Although the internal investigation may go for another five months, an LA Times article says, "the future looks bleak" for the NBC news anchor.

Williams is fighting for his job (or a payout) after his reporting came into question earlier this year. At this point, a return is unlikely. The LA Times article quotes a NBC staffer: "If there was [a path back], don't you think we'd be hearing about it by now?"

But if Williams doesn't resign on his own accord, which also seems unlikely, the network will have to pay between $20 and $30 in severance, based on the terms of Williams' contract. 

So far, the investigation has uncovered ten "embellishments."

Image source.

Discussion Starters: 

• Should Williams resign and forfeit the severance pay? 
• What, if anything, should NBC communicate at this point? 

Dr. Oz Responds to Criticism

In a video on his website, Dr. Oz responds to criticism that he promotes products for the advertising income. Ten doctors have called for Oz's removal from the faculty of Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, where Oz is the vice chairman of the surgery department. 

In a letter to the dean of medicine, the doctors questioned Oz's credibility. 

Lee Goldman, M.D.
Dean of the Faculties of Health Sciences and Medicine
Columbia University

Dear Dr. Goldman:

I am writing to you on behalf of myself and the undersigned colleagues below, all of whom are distinguished physicians.

We are surprised and dismayed that Columbia University's College of Physicians and Surgeons would permit Dr. Mehmet Oz to occupy a faculty appointment, let alone a senior administrative position in the Department of Surgery.

As described here and here, as well as in other publications, Dr. Oz has repeatedly shown disdain for science and for evidence-based medicine, as well as baseless and relentless opposition to the genetic engineering of food crops. Worst of all, he has manifested an egregious lack of integrity by promoting quack treatments and cures in the interest of personal financial gain.

Thus, Dr. Oz is guilty of either outrageous conflicts of interest or flawed judgments [sic] about what constitutes appropriate medical treatments, or both. Whatever the nature of his pathology, members of the public are being misled and endangered, which makes Dr. Oz's presence on the faculty of a prestigious medical institution unacceptable.

In his rebuttal, Oz questions the doctors' ethics and stands by his approach:

"Figuring out how to talk about your health and how to talk to you about it can be difficult, and there's been a backlash to my approach in some parts of the medical community," Oz said. "The 10 doctors who attacked me got what they wanted: sensational headlines and soundbites. I've long believed that doctors should never fight their battles, or each other, in public. But now I believe that I must."

It doesn't help Dr. Oz's case that his 2:20 video starts with a 30-second commercial for Nasacort.

Oz also wrote an opinion piece for Time, defending alternative medicine: 

"My exploration of alternative medicine has never been intended to take the place of conventional medicine, but rather as additive. Critics often imply that any exploration of alternative methods means abandoning conventional approaches. It does not. In fact, many institutions like mine use the names 'complementary' or 'integrative' medicine, which is also appropriate."

Discussion Starters:

• Assess the letter and Dr. Oz's video response. Which are the strongest and weakest arguments of each?
• If you were the dean, what would you do? 

Lord & Taylor Pays to Promote Clothes

An AdWeek article described how Lord & Taylor department store paid people to promote its clothes on Instagram. The campaign advertised a new Design Lab Collection and featured 50 women wearing one particular dress.

Lord & Taylor CMO Michael Crotty told AdWeek the purpose of the campaign:

"The program was designed to introduce Design Lab to this customer where she is engaging and consuming content every day. The goal was to make her stop in her feed and ask why all her favorite bloggers are wearing this dress and what is Design Lab? Using Instagram as that vehicle is a logical choice, especially when it comes to fashion."

This photo received more than 13,000 likes-a big number, even for a cute dress, which sold out quickly.

The strategy worked, but critics questioned whether the company "crossed the line" of ethics. According to Federal Trade Commission guidelines, companies and those who promote their products must make compensation arrangements explicit. Just as bloggers need to identify when they're paid, people posting pictures of themselves on Instagram need to reveal their relationship with the company.

An article in Marketing Land tells us more:

"That's a clear violation of U.S. Federal Trade Commission guidelines for digital advertising, says Ted Murphy, founder and CEO of IZEA, a company that acts as middleman between brands and social media influencers. The FTC rules state that when people are paid to post they must disclose that fact in a 'clear and conspicuous' way.

"'There's really no excuse for not disclosing that there's a material relationship there,' Murphy told Marketing Land. 'These FTC guidelines have been out there since 2009.'"

Following Marketing Land's article, some Instagram posts were modified to include "#ad," which could serve as disclosure of the paid relationship. Also, Marketing Land received this statement from Lord & Taylor:

"We are proud of this campaign and our partnerships but want to reiterate that our influencers were compensated by Lord & Taylor, as is customary in these types of programs. We are always looking for ways to improve our process and communications with our customers. We look forward to continuing to build great marketing campaigns."

Discussion Starters:

• What do you see as the purpose of the FTC guidelines? Do you think the guidelines apply in this case?
• How well did Lord & Taylor handle the criticism?

RBS Executive Leaves After Snapchat Photos Become Known

Rory Cullinan, the chairman of the Royal Bank of Scotland's investment bank, will leave the company by agreement. The news followed shortly after Snapchat images became publicly known.

Last year, Cullinan sent his daughter Snapchats with captions saying, "Not a fan of board meetings xx," "Boring meeting xx," and "Another friggin meeting." Snapchats don't last-unless, of course, someone takes a screenshot and posts them to Instagram, as his daughter did, with the message, "Happy Father's Day to the indisputable king of Snapchat."

Cullinan was with the bank for six years but in his current role for only two months. The Telegraph reported that critics didn't think McEwan took his role seriously, particularly because the bank is mostly owned by the government. RBS CEO Ross McEwan gave this statement:

"We would like to express our thanks to Rory for his very significant contribution to the rebuild of RBS over the past 6 years. He has built and led APS, Non-Core, RCR and recently completed the very successful follow-on sale of Citizens post its IPO last year. We wish him every success in the future."

Cullinan said, "I am pleased and proud to have played a significant part in restoring RBS to a safe and sound agenda over the past 6 years. I wish all my colleagues continued success."

In his defense, someone wrote on the Telegraph site: "Personally I think any sane well adjusted adult would find those sort of meetings boring. If there any grounds for criticism it is that he didn't cut the number of unnecessary meetings typical in large banks."

Image source.

Discussion Starters:

• Was it the right decision for Cullinan to leave the bank after six years? Why or why not?
• What's your view of the comment about boring meetings in large banks?
• In what ways, if at all, does it matter that the bank is mostly government owned?
• Does anyone else find it strange for a father to send such messages to his daughter and for her to post them on Instagram? 

Report About Rolling Stone Article Causes Retraction

In December, Rolling Stone admitted failures in its damning article about a "culture of rape" at the University of Virginia. Now, following an independent report, the magazine has offered a full retraction.

The report was issued by a group at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, hired to investigate the magazine's report. Concluding that Rolling Stone's investigation was "a failure that was unavoidable," the report identified terrible consequences of the article for the University and for the fraternity members who were accused. 

In addition, the report warns that the shoddy article may do further damage to rape victims:

"Erdely [the author] and her editors had hoped their investigation would sound an alarm about campus sexual assault and would challenge Virginia and other universities to do better. Instead, the magazine's failure may have spread the idea that many women invent rape allegations. (Social scientists analyzing crime records report that the rate of false rape allegations is 2 to 8 percent.) At the University of Virginia, 'It's going to be more difficult now to engage some people … because they have a preconceived notion that women lie about sexual assault,' said Alex Pinkleton, a UVA student and rape survivor who was one of Erdely's sources."

In part, the report identifies challenges in writing a good story: 

"There is a tension in magazine and narrative editing between crafting a readable story-a story that flows-and providing clear attribution of quotations and facts. It can be clunky and disruptive to write ‘she said' over and over. There should be room in magazine journalism for diverse narrative voicing-if the underlying reporting is solid."

Sabrina Rubin Erdely wrote an apology statement about her investigation and reporting: 

"The past few months, since my Rolling Stone article 'A Rape on Campus' was first called into question, have been among the most painful of my life. Reading the Columbia account of the mistakes and misjudgments in my reporting was a brutal and humbling experience. I want to offer my deepest apologies: to Rolling Stone's readers, to my Rolling Stone editors and colleagues, to the U.V.A. community, and to any victims of sexual assault who may feel fearful as a result of my article.

"Over my 20 years of working as an investigative journalist - including at Rolling Stone, a magazine I grew up loving and am honored to work for - I have often dealt with sensitive topics and sources. In writing each of these stories I must weigh my compassion against my journalistic duty to find the truth. However, in the case of Jackie and her account of her traumatic rape, I did not go far enough to verify her story. I allowed my concern for Jackie's well-being, my fear of re-traumatizing her, and my confidence in her credibility to take the place of more questioning and more facts. These are mistakes I will not make again.

"Reporting on rape has unique challenges, but the journalist still has the responsibility to get it right. I hope that my mistakes in reporting this story do not silence the voices of victims that need to be heard."

University of Virginia President Teresa Sullivan said the story "...did nothing to combat sexual violence, and it damaged serious efforts to address the issue. Irresponsible journalism unjustly damaged the reputations of many innocent individuals and the University of Virginia.  

Discussion Starters: 

• Some have reminded us that, although the story wasn't verified, some of the incidents described (or something else) may still have happened. How, if at all, is this relevant? 
• Erdely was not terminated from her position at Rolling Stone. Should she have been? 
• A writer for The New Yorker wrote a poignant summary of the situation. What else do you learn from reading this article?

Days Inn Explains Employee Separation

A Days Inn employee was interviewed by The Washington Post about wages and subsequently left or lost her job. The article was about the pending 25-cent wage increase. Days Inn and other employers, such as Wal-Mart, have promised small increases in hourly wages, particularly following protests from Fight for $15 and other organizations. 

Although Shanna Tippen said the increase would be helpful, but in the long-run, it was "not much difference" except for buying diapers: "The diapers, they're $24.98 at Wal-Mart." The article also quoted the Pine Bluff, Arkansas, Days Inn manager, Herry Patel, about the increase: "[The referendum] was bad.  Bad for Arkansas. Everybody wants free money in Pine Bluff."

After the story was published, Patel called the reporter to dispute the quotation, and Tippen called to say she was fired: "He said I was stupid and dumb for talking to [The Post]. . . . He said it was wrong for me to talk to you."  

Patel denied terminating Tippen. Rather, he said, "She walked out herself. I didn't fire her." Tippen reiterated her story to the Post author.

Wyndham, the Days Inn's operator, gave this statement to the Post:

"...while we do not control or oversee staffing decisions at our franchised locations, we do require that each independently owned and operated hotel comply with all local, state and federal laws, especially as it relates to employment practices. While we can't speak to the specifics of this or any particular situation at a franchised location, please know that ours is an organization which values and respects the contributions of all associates and that we encourage each of our franchisees to do the same."

Image source.

Discussion Starters: 

• Read more about the situation. Which version of the story do you believe?
• Did the employee make the wrong decision by talking to the press? She's out of a job now and desperately needs one. 

American Airlines Refuses Refund for Parents of Deceased Child

When a family tragically lost their nine-year-old daughter, they wanted to cash in their American Airline tickets for the vacation they had planned. But the airline refused.

The Cantrells' trip was just five months after Madison "Scout" died from an asthma attack. Her 13-year-old sister, Katie, didn't want to travel to their annual beach destination because it would be too painful. They requested a refund through the Airlines' online system and received a denial letter:

"After reviewing the documentation submitted, it has been determined the request does not meet our exception requirements. The ticket purchased is non-refundable so we cannot offer a refund, issue a travel voucher, or transfer this ticket to another person. The ticket will remain valid in our system for one year from the original date of issue, at which time it will expire and all value will be lost. [...] As a one-time courtesy, authorization was documented in your reservation to waive the change fee assessed when a non-refundable ticket is changed. [...] Your new ticket will be subject to any additional collection, if necessary, as governed by the applicable fares and fare rules in effect at that time."

The "Gulliver Business Travel" section of the Economist explains what happened next:

"By now, Gulliver readers will be able to predict with weary certainty what happened next. Which makes it all the more incredible that American failed to spot the inevitable chain of events that would follow. The mother posted the letter on Facebook, social media poured opprobrium on the airline for its heartlessness, and the carrier swiftly backtracked. As soon it started to feel the heat, American announced that it had apologised and would refund the Cantrells. But not before its reputation, such as it is, had already taken a shoeing."

According to The Consumerist, the decision is inconsistent with the airline's own policy:

"Nonrefundable tickets generally cannot be refunded. However, exceptions may be available under the following circumstances: Death of the passenger, immediate family member, or travelling companion."

Eventually, American Airlines came around:

"We extend our deepest sympathies to the Cantrell family on the loss of their daughter. We fully refunded [her] ticket last night and apologized to [the family] for not doing so immediately when she first contacted us."

Image source.

Discussion Starters:

• How do you think the original decision to deny the refund happened, particularly if it's inconsistent with the airlines' own policy? 
• The Cantrell family say they heard about the refund from news sources before they were informed by the airline. Why do you think American would handle the decision in this way? Was it the right move?
• Assess the airlines' apology statement. Should the company say more, or does this suffice?

Fraternity's Facebook Posts Cause Suspension

Penn State fraternity Kappa Delta Rho has been suspended and may face criminal charges because of Facebook photos. The images, posted to two "secret" pages, showed women who are nude, unconscious, or in other compromised states. Other photos revealed drug sales and hazing.

A cease-and-desist letter from the university's Interfraternity Council explains the decision:

"This action is being taken in response to the chapter hosting two private Facebook pages where highly inappropriate photographs were posted of activities, events, and comments that are in direct violation of the standards and values of a recognized student organization and/or fraternity at Penn State University. The State College Police have shared copies of photographs and communication that were posted on these Facebook pages with the Office of Student Conduct, the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Life, and the Interfraternity Council."

A statement from the university similarly condemns the action and explains the investigation.  

A New York Times article portrays student sentiment: "Students on this campus of about 47,000 were dismayed but unsurprised by the episode."

The incident brings new questions about how the University handles sex crimes. In 2011, football coach Jerry Sandusky was arrested for abusing boys while school officials, including famed coach Joe Paterno, kept silent.

Image source.

Discussion Starters:

• Consider Facebook's "Community Standards," updated just this week. Which are violated by the fraternity? 
• Assess the University's and Interfraternity Council's statements. Consider the main points, tone, organization, and so on. 
• Do you find the Sandusky situation relevant? Why or why not?

Oklahoma Students Expelled for Racist Chant

Students at the University of Oklahoma are paying the price for participating in a racist chant caught on video. Two students at Sigma Alpha Epsilon were expelled for "creating a hostile educational environment for others," and the university chapter was closed. (Read letter to students.)

Students seem to be chanting the following:

There will never be a n** at SAE
There will never be a n** at SAE
You can hang him from a tree
But he'll never sign with me
There will never be a n** at SAE

Another video shows the chapter's house mother using the "N-word" repeatedly.

The national chapter of Sigma Alpha Epsilon issued a statement, including the following:

"In separate statements, the two men who have been expelled from the university have mentioned that the song was 'taught to us.' However, as has been maintained in previous statements, the national fraternity does not teach such a racist, hateful chant, and this chant is not part of any education or training. Our investigation has found very likely that the men learned the song from fellow chapter members, which reiterates why Sigma Alpha Epsilon did not hesitate to close the chapter completely because of the culture that may have been fostered in the group."

The incident raises issues of "serious lack of mature oversight," according to a lawyer on another case against the fraternity. In 2011, a Cornell University African-American sophomore died following a hazing ritual at SAE. George Desdunes was blindfolded and tied up. He died of alcohol poisoning. Although the fraternity was cleared of criminal wrongdoing, there were other charges, and the case is being pursued in civil court.

Attorney Douglas Fierberg said,

"By allowing teenagers to make these decisions independent of adult guidance, you can end up with a chapter gone far awry with things like this, even injury and death. Many of these chapters insist on self-management. But it's that very thing that makes them far more riskier than any other organization in the entire nation."

Discussion Starters:

• One SAE student and the parents of another wrote apologies. What else, if anything, should be done at this point?
• A writer for the The Washington Post said the expulsions are unconstitutional, based on the First Amendment. Read the article and discuss your perspective.

McDonald's Limits Antibiotic Use in Chickens

Until now, McDonald's approach has been, yes, to offer some healthier menu items, but more so, to promote their current food. John Oliver poked fun at the company's ad campaign, "Our Food, Your Questions":

"There's something a little suspicious about the way that they're celebrating the fact that their food is made out of food."  

This week, McDonald's is taking real action: limiting the antibiotics that are used in chickens. Steve Easterbrook just took over as CEO on March 1 after a 12-year history with McDonald's in the U.K. According to The New York Times, this is Easterbrook's "first major act": 

"Mr. Easterbrook's first major act as C.E.O. was to announce that within two years all the chicken served at its restaurants would be free of antibiotics, or at least those antibiotics also used in humans. It was a big move for McDonald's, which is one of the biggest buyers of chicken, and one that pleased health officials who see overuse of antibiotics in animal husbandry - and the resulting antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria - as a serious threat to human health."

The company hopes Easterbrook will turn around failing McDonald's restaurants throughout the world as he did in the U.K. This Business Insider chart of same-store sales shows that the company has work to do.

 Image source. Chart source.

Discussion Starters: 

• Assess McDonald's announcement about antibiotics. What effect do you think this will have on suppliers, consumers, and investors? 
• Easterbook declined comment for The New York Times article. Why would he decline, and is this a good move?
• What other communications or actions should the company take to restore the image and increase revenue?

Ferguson Emails Reveal Racist Attitudes

Emails among Ferguson, MO, police officers and court officers reveal racial bias. In an investigation following the shooting of Michael Brown (and the grand jury's decision not to indict the officer who shot him), the Justice Department discovered offensive emails, six of which were published.

One email, according to NPR, said that "President Barack Obama would not be president for very long because 'what black man holds a steady job for four years.'" Others compared the president to a chimpanzee and conveyed more stereotypes about African-Americans, Muslims, and people on welfare.

According a the Justice Department's report, the emails reflect the culture of the police department and court system:

"Ferguson's police and municipal court practices both reflect and exacerbate existing racial bias, including racial stereotypes. Ferguson's own data establish clear racial disparities that adversely impact African Americans. The evidence shows that discriminatory intent is part of the reason for these disparities."

In a news conference, Ferguson Major James Knowles condemned the behavior and announced that two of the three employees who wrote the emails were terminated, and a third was placed on administrative leave. 

Discussion Starters: 

• Assess the mayor's news conference. How well does he assure the public that proper actions have been taken?
• What other communications would you like to see, for example, from the police department or court system?
• How do we get people to stop writing emails that they don't want discovered?