Law Firm Faces Backlash About Diversity

When a law firm announced its 2019 partners, they didn’t expect such a strong reaction. A photo shows the 12 members of the new group—all white and only one woman. Paul Weiss is an elite firm in midtown Manhattan and claims that this year is unusual.

The firm has since removed the photo from LinkedIn, where it drew attention. About 170 lawyers across the country wrote an open letter to express their wishes for a more diverse legal community.

Paul Weiss leaders took quick action to address the controversy and held a town hall meeting for employees. Firm leaders also say this group is unusually not diverse. In fact, the firm was recognized by a Microsoft initiative that offers bonuses to diverse law firms. In addition, 23% of the firm’s partners are women compared to about 18% of other law firms’ top leaders. The firm’s website boasts additional awards for diversity, including being ranked #16 in The American Lawyer’s 2018 Diversity Scorecard.

An email to Paul Weiss employees shows the words “diversity” and “associate professional satisfaction” in quotes, and a writer for the website Above the Law warns,

“…maybe there’s still some work to be done in mastering how to talk about these subjects. In general, don’t put anything in quotation marks that you wouldn’t be willing to sarcastically put air quotes around in conversation. That’s my advice.”

Discussion:

• What’s your view of the photo and the reaction: should the firm have avoided the composite, did people overreact, or something else?

• How do you assess the firm’s response? What else, if anything, should the firm leaders do to improve its image?

• What persuasive strategies do the attorneys use in their open letter? Which are most and least effective for the situation?

Gillette Ad Gets Mixed Reviews

Gillette took a risk with its new ad campaign. Spinning its 30-year slogan, “The Best a Man Can Get,” the company introduced, “The Best a Man Can Be.” A new video references sexual harassment, challenges the expression “boys will be boys,” and encourages men to “hold other men accountable.”

Gillette explains the rationale in a press release. In addition, the URL thebestamancanbe.org redirects to https://gillette.com/en-us/the-best-men-can-be, where the company explains the campaign:

Thirty years ago, we launched our The Best A Man Can Get tagline.

Since then, it has been an aspirational statement, reflecting standards that many men strive to achieve.

But turn on the news today and it’s easy to believe that men are not at their best. Many find themselves at a crossroads, caught between the past and a new era of masculinity. While it is clear that changes are needed, where and how we can start to effect that change is less obvious for many. And when the changes needed seem so monumental, it can feel daunting to begin. So, let’s do it together.

It’s time we acknowledge that brands, like ours, play a role in influencing culture. And as a company that encourages men to be their best, we have a responsibility to make sure we are promoting positive, attainable, inclusive and healthy versions of what it means to be a man. With that in mind, we have spent the last few months taking a hard look at our past and coming communication and reflecting on the types of men and behaviors we want to celebrate. We’re inviting all men along this journey with us – to strive to be better, to make us better, and to help each other be better.

From today on, we pledge to actively challenge the stereotypes and expectations of what it means to be a man everywhere you see Gillette. In the ads we run, the images we publish to social media, the words we choose, and so much more.

As part of The Best Men Can Be campaign, Gillette is committing to donate $1 million per year for the next three years to non-profit organizations executing programs in the United States designed to inspire, educate and help men of all ages achieve their personal “best” and become role models for the next generation.

Our tagline needs to continue to inspire us all to be better every day, and to help create a new standard for boys to admire and for men to achieve… Because the boys of today are the men of tomorrow.

We’ve all got work to do. And it starts today.

Not everyone appreciates the new campaign. The YouTube video received 582,000 likes and 1 million dislikes. Some feel that the video unfairly accuses all men of not doing better.

A Gillette spokesperson said the campaign “is much more than a video—it is a commitment to spark and contribute to positive change through our voice as an advertiser and our actions as a brand and a company.” Analysts say the current boycotts probably won’t last long and will have little bottom-line effect on the company.

Discussion:

• What’s your view of the video? Do you appreciate the message, find it offensive, or something else?

• What else, if anything, should the company say in response to the controversy?

• Which leadership character dimensions are illustrated by this story?

Lawsuit Charges Purdue Pharma Family with Instigating Opioid Crisis

In a 312-page complaint, Massachusetts lawyers detail how members of the Purdue Pharma family contributed to the opioid epidemic. The complaint shows the company’s aggressive marketing strategy, including how it convinced doctors to over-prescribe drugs.

One argument in the documentation shows how representatives were trained to encourage doctors to prescribe medication to what the company called “opioid-naive” patients:

Purdue also promoted its drugs for opioid-naive patients using the receptive term “first line opioid.” “First line” is a medical term for the preferred first step in treating a patient. Opioids are not an appropriate first line therapy. Nevertheless, Purdue’s internal documents and testimony from sales reps shows that Purdue repeatedly promoted OxyContin as “first line” — “the first thing they would take to treat pain.” (Sic: “first-time opioid” should include a hyphen.)

A 2001 email written by Richard Sackler, whose family owns OxyContin, blames victims:

“We have to hammer on abusers in every way possible. They are the culprits and the problem. They are reckless criminals.”

The lawsuit also charges the family with claiming that opioids are addictive to only one percent of the population, although they had no evidence for that claim.

This lawsuit follows others in Washington, Ohio, and Alabama. Last year, the company did stop promoting opioids.

Purdue image source.

Discussion:

• Read more in the legal complaint. According to the documentation, how did the company wrongfully use persuasive communication?

• In some of the documentation, we see ads and tactics that any company might use. Which do you find to be typical examples, and which cross an ethical line?

MSU Gets Another New Interim President

Michigan State University hired a second interim president. First, President Lou Anna Simon resigned after 13 years following criticism that she didn’t do enough to stop Dr. Larry Nassar from abusing girls. John Engler replaced her as interim president in 2018, but he, too, faced criticism for insensitivity to Nassar’s victims.

Most recently, Engler commented after a $425 million fund was approved for 332 current claimants and another $75 million was approved for additional victims. Engler said, “The people who got the $425 million are probably OK." Engler said he was thinking more about the potential additional victims who haven’t been part of the process yet. He made things worse when he said more:

"You’ve got people, they are hanging on and this has been … there are a lot of people who are touched by this, survivors who haven’t been in the spotlight. In some ways they have been able to deal with this better than the ones who’ve been in the spotlight who are still enjoying that moment at times, you know, the awards and recognition. And it’s ending. It’s almost done.”

People took great offense to his implication that the earlier claimants have “enjoyed the spotlight.” So now, MSU has a new interim president, Satish Udpa.

MSU image source.

Udpa image source.

Discussion:

• Try to see Engler’s point of view. What was he trying to convey with his comments?

• We might say that Engler’s comments lacked compassion. What else is problematic about his comments?

• What’s your view? Was forcing Engler’s resignation the right thing to do? Why or why not?

Robots Screen Candidates' Social Media

A Wall Street Journal video explains how DeepSense uses artificial intelligence to analyze a job candidate’s personality. When companies post a job, recruiters or hiring managers identify what is most important for success; for example, how important is teamwork or project management? DeepSense then looks at a candidate’s social media profile to assess personality.

Founder Amarpreet Kalkat explains that the system may review a social media profile for only six seconds and will generate a report about the applicant’s DISC profile (a personality assessment) and “Big Five” personality traits. Using psycholinguistics, the computer analyzes language the candidate uses.

Kalkat says their results are 75% accurate, while traditional personality tests are 82% accurate.

Discussion:

• What’s your view of using AI in this way? How confident would you be applying for a job that uses this technology?

• How relevant is personality to a position? What are the advantages to a company of using such a system, and what are the potential disadvantages?

• The video refers to “DeepSense,” but the website shows “DeeperSense.” How do you explain the discrepancy?

McKinsey PPT Slide Causes Problems

Back in 2006, Boeing hired management consultancy McKinsey to help the company launch its 787 Dreamliner despite rising titanium prices. According to a New York Times article, McKinsey evaluated a proposal for Boeing “to mine titanium in India through a foreign partnership financed by an influential Ukrainian oligarch.”

On a PowerPoint slide, the consultancy suggested that Boeing “respect traditional bureaucratic process including use of bribes.” Included on the slide were names of eight “key Indian officials.” As the article notes, “Nowhere in the slide did McKinsey advise that such a scheme would be illegal or unwise.”

McKinsey admitted authoring the report only after learning that the Times had a copy. Details are fuzzy, and McKinsey isn’t offering more explanation.

Discussion:

• What’s your view of McKinsey’s responsibility in this situation? Do you believe they encouraged illegal activity, were just doing the job of management consultant firm and considering cultural realities, or something else?

• The PPT slide seems to have implicated McKinsey. Should the consultants have been more careful about what was documented? Why or why not?

• What character issues may be at play in this situation?

• The NYT author wrote, “Nowhere in the slide…” I would say, “Nowhere on the slide…” Which is correct—or are both acceptable?

Acting Attorney General's Credentials Questioned

Acting U.S. Attorney General Matthew Whitaker seems to have inflated his self-description as an “Academic All-American.” The title appeared on a bio for his previous law firm’s website, on an application for a judge position in 2010, and on a resume discovered from 2014.

Whitaker played football at the University of Iowa for two years, but he didn’t receive the official honor, according to the organization that grants the title. In 1992, the title went to another Iowa player.

Part of the confusion may be caused by a media guide produced by the university. An assistant athletic director admitted to describing Whitaker as “District VII academic All-American,” which is not correct.

Whitaker image source. Resume icon image.

Discussion:

• The Wall Street Journal report doesn’t include a quotation from Whitaker. What, if anything, should Whitaker say to defend himself?

• What on your resume could be called into question? Have you exaggerated any of your experience that could be discovered? Should you change anything to be more accurate?

• How is this situation an issue of integrity? What other character dimensions could be at play here?

Juul Employees Can't Juul at Work

The e-cigarette company has decided to follow the law and prohibit its employees from Juuling at work. The law isn’t new: The California law against vaping in the workplace has been on the books since 2016.

A Wall Street Journal article describes vaping etiquette from the American Vaping Association:

There is etiquette for in-office vaping, says Gregory Conley, president of the American Vaping Association. Foremost: Don’t blow clouds. Take a puff and hold your breath for three to five seconds, and the vapor evaporates in your mouth. “If it’s 10 degrees outside and I want a single puff, I just take a puff and hold my breath” when indoors, he says. “Ninety-nine percent of people don’t care so long as they don’t see anything.”

Meanwhile, the U.S. Surgeon General just released a warning against vaping. Experts say e-cigarettes have toxic chemicals, and users are at higher risk for a heart attack. Studies indicate that teens who vape are more likely to smoke cigarettes later on.

Discussion:

• The situation is a confusing issue of integrity. Some might question why employees were allowed to Juul, against the 2016 law. What’s your view of their decision?

• Juul is popular among young people even though the product is intended for people 21-and-over. To what extent is that the company’s responsibility?

NIH Changes Funding Practices

Following criticism in May, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) ended a study aiming to understand whether drinking alcohol every day could have health benefits. The study received $67 million in funding from six alcohol companies.

Now, the NIH is sharpening its guidelines for how employees of its eight institutes seek donations. The NIH director said, “We have to do everything we can to ensure the integrity of the NIH grants process and the quality of our research is above reproach, which means worrying about conflicts.” In addition, the NIH is planning for consistency across its institutes.

Some wonder why the NIH wasn’t already practicing due diligence and preventing conflicts of interest. Critics say the NIH isn’t doing enough and should accept private funding only for general use—not for specific research.

Discussion:

• What’s your view of the NIH’s practices? How is this situation an issue of integrity for the organization?

• The NIH’s credibility has taken a hit. What can the leaders do to recover the organization’s image?

Report on Larry Nassar

A new report on the former Olympics coach and doctor, Larry Nassar, blames officials at Michigan State University, the U.S. Olympics Committee (USOC), and USA Gymnastics for allowing his abuse of hundreds of girls over decades. The investigators concluded, “Numerous institutions and individuals enabled his abuse and failed to stop him.”

In some cases when officials learned of an abuse allegation against Nassar, they waited weeks or months to report to; in other cases, officials reported claims but didn’t do enough to follow up. In still other cases, officials did nothing at all.

Nassar was finally convicted and sentenced to what will be life in prison. With the report results, some hope the USOC will now be investigated.

The report aligns with an NPR podcast, Believed, tracing claims against Nassar and his medical defense, which was accepted by too many for too long.

Image source.

Discussion:

• How do you think the abuse continued for so long? If you listen to the podcast Believed, you’ll hear Nassar’s defense during police interviews.

• Analyze the report. What business communication principles are followed, and in what ways could the report be improved?

Trump Undocumented Workers Speak Out

Employees of Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, NJ, say they are undocumented in the U.S. and express disappointment at the president’s comments about immigrants. For five years, Victorina Morales has worked at the property, and her responsibilities sometimes include providing housekeeping services for the president’s private quarters.

Although the president may not have known about their status, Morales and a former employee say several within the housekeeping, maintenance, and landscaping crews don’t have papers to work legally in the U.S.

Morales said her status is known at the club, and she was hurt when she heard the president comparing recent immigrants to criminals:

“We are tired of the abuse, the insults, the way he talks about us when he knows that we are here helping him make money. We sweat it out to attend to his every need and have to put up with his humiliation.”

During the presidential campaign, President Trump said of his businesses, “We didn’t have one illegal immigrant on the job.”

Image source.

Discussion:

• What risks does Morales take by speaking out? Why might she forge ahead and not be deterred by those risks?

• How is this a potential issue of integrity for President Trump?

• Should President Trump be held accountable for undocumented workers on his properties? Why or why not?

Deutsche Bank on the Defense

With stock at an all-time low and a German government raid last week, Deutsche Bank is trying to reassure customers and shareholders. Finance chief James von Moltke said on CNBC, “To date, we’re not aware of any wrongdoing on our part.” The investigation relates to the Panama Papers, which are documents made public in 2016 that revealed tax havens for individuals from more than 200 countries.

Throughout the CNBC interview, von Moltke tries to put the issue into perspective. He says the investigation involves a small, trust services business that the bank sold earlier this year. However, some of the money laundering accusations involve current managers. Still, von Moltke claims that new precautions are in place today.

Deutsche Bank stock fell further on the news, losing 51% of its value this year.

Discussion:

• Assess the CFO’s video interview with CNBC. What persuasive communication strategies do you observe?

• Which are his strongest and weakest arguments?

• Also assess his delivery skills: tone, rapport, volume, pace, and so on.
  

Marriott Security Breach

Personal information of more than 500,00 guests was stolen from the Starwood reservation system. Exposed data includes payment card information, and critics say the company could have avoided the breach years ago. In 2015, Starwood announced a small breach, which cybersecurity experts say should have inspired the company to do more at the time. Starwood argues it didn’t realize the risk, and Marriott leaders argue that they had not yet acquired Starwood. On Friday, Marriott shares were down 5.6%.

A notice at the top of the Marriott homepage reads, “For more information on the Starwood guest reservation database security incident, please click here.” Although the breach was from a Starwood database, the media is consistently reporting the news as “Marriott.” That link and a press release on the website both go to legal sounding statements, although they do provide FAQs at the bottom.

Lawsuits have already been filed against the company for failing to protect users’ data.

Discussion:

• Is the company taking adequate responsibility for the breach? Explain your response.

• How can Marriott respond to this crisis and protect the brand at this point?

• How can the website information be improved? Consider the primary and second audiences, communication objectives, organization, writing style and so on.

Prep School Criticized for Abuse and False Apps

College prep school T.M. Landry has garnered national attention for helping Black students get into college, but all has not been well at the school. Students are speaking out about emotional and physical abuse as well as falsified college applications.

According to a New York Times report, examples of physical abuse include “forced to kneel on rice, rocks, or hot concrete for hours” and being “choked, yelled at, and berated.” Students report being told to lie on college applications about classes they took and the conditions under which they grew up, for example, exaggerating their poverty.

The Landrys, a married couple who run the school, defended their actions, saying they push kids to their limits. Mr Landry admits to physical contact, and he said, “Oh, I yell a lot.” Since a 2013 case against him that included probation, Landry says he no longer practices physical punishment. He also denied falsifying students’ applications.

College results have not been great. Students who spent more time at the prep school are more likely to withdraw or transfer to less demanding programs. The New York Times article describes an unaccredited school with little traditional programming, so students may not be academically prepared for the schools that admit them.

Image source.

Discussion:

• Assess the school website. The opening video features Mr. Landry, and the rest of the site boasts college acceptances. How convincing might families find the way the school is promoted? Other than admitting abuse, should the site say more to give parents and prospective students a more accurate picture of the school philosophy and practice?

• How is this situation an example of failing integrity? Also consider intent versus impact. What could the founders' intent, and how is that different from the impact? 

Lettuce Recall Data

An opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal highlights the value data for decision making. With the article title, “Lettuce Try Not to Panic,” Jim Prevor criticizes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) edict that “U.S. consumers not eat any romaine lettuce, and retailers and restaurants not serve or sell any”:

There are 43 people known to be infected with the outbreak strain of E. coli 0157:H7. The CDC interviewed 25 of them. Eighty-eight percent of those 25 people, as opposed to 47% of the general population, said they ate romaine lettuce in the week before they got sick.

From population data, the Prevor concludes that you have a 1 in 11 million chance of getting sick from Romain lettuce, and a 1 in 28 million chance of ending up in the hospital. The author makes the odds even more concrete:

If this outbreak were active every day, and you ate one salad a day, on average you would be hospitalized for E. coli once every 77,000 years.

Even these data, Prevor argues, are overstated for most of us. Children, older people, and people with compromised immune systems are far more likely to get sick than the average adult. As a result of the CDC warning, the author estimates “tens of millions of dollars in losses.”

On the CDC website, a “Food Safety Alert” details the investigation results and advice.

Lettuce image source.

Discussion:

• What’s your view of the CDC’s recommendation: better safe than sorry or overblown?

• How well does Prevor argue his point? What persuasive strategies does he use? Which are his strongest and weakest arguments? What may be missing from his argument?

• Help an audience visualize some of the data in Prevor’s article. What charts or graphs would be useful to help consumers make an informed decision?

Nissan Chairman Is Arrested

Nissan’s chairman was arrested for financial misconduct, including under-reporting his income in securities fillings. Carlos Ghosn may have been engaging in improprieties for years.

The news came as a surprise to many. Ghosn is a popular business figure, credited with turning around Nissan, Renault, and Mitsubishi by forming an alliance and directing cost-cutting and layoffs. According to a Wall Street Journal article, the shock is felt particularly at Renault; a union leader described the reaction as “a feeling of stupefaction and a lot of anger.”

The French government has a 15% state in Renault, so President Emmanuel Macron also weighed in: “As a shareholder, the French state will remain extremely vigilant regarding the stability of the alliance.” At this point, officials are still trying to sort out the news and determine leadership going forward.

Nissan CEO Hiroto Saikawa delivered a news statement, translated in English on Bloomberg. The company also issued this matter-of-fact statement.

Nissan image source. Ghosn image source.

Discussion:

• Why would a successful business executive engage in financial misconduct? What leadership character dimensions are lacking?

• How does financial impropriety go on for years in a situation like this? Who should be accountable for the misconduct?

• Assess Saikawa’s news statement. What works well to improve brand image, and what could be improved?

Student Is Escorted Out of Class

A biology lecturer at University of Texas at San Antonio called campus police about a student’s behavior. Another student in the class tweeted, “So this happened today in class, a girl had her feet up and the professor called the police after calling our class uncivil.” A video shows an African-American student being escorted out of the classroom.

The University posted a tweet soon after the incident:

Later, President Taylor Eighmy sent a letter to students announcing that the instructor will be replaced for the rest of the term and that the student will be welcomed back. The university is investigating the incident, including potential racial bias, because the student is African-American.

USTA image source.

Discussion:

• A student in the class posted that the instructor referred to the class as “uncivil.” What’s your view of civility in a classroom setting? What examples would describe an uncivil classroom?

• Did the instructor do the right thing by calling campus police? Did campus police do the right thing by escorting the student out?

• What other options are available to an instructor wanting to manage classroom behavior?

Google and Facebook Drop Forced Arbitration

Following Google employee walkouts and demands, both Google and Facebook have eliminated the requirement for employees to settle sexual harassment complaints internally. Tech companies Uber, Lyft, and Microsoft made the same change in the past couple of years.

Previously, all of these companies had clauses in their policies, which employees agree to when hired, that forced employees to give up their right to sue the company for sexual harassment.

Critics of forced arbitration say the policy puts victims at a disadvantage. Businesses are more likely to win cases in arbitration than in front of a judge. The internal practice also protects the company from public scrutiny and allows perpetrators to more easily get jobs in other companies, continuing the cycle of harassment.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai announced Google’s decision and other policy changes in an email to employees, which was posted on the company’s blog:

Hi everyone,

At Google we try hard to build a workplace that supports our employees and empowers them to do their best work. As CEO, I take this responsibility very seriously and I’m committed to making the changes we need to improve. Over the past few weeks Google’s leaders and I have heard your feedback and have been moved by the stories you’ve shared.

We recognize that we have not always gotten everything right in the past and we are sincerely sorry for that. It’s clear we need to make some changes.

Going forward, we will provide more transparency on how we handle concerns. We’ll give better support and care to the people who raise them. And we will double down on our commitment to be a representative, equitable, and respectful workplace.

Today, we’re announcing a comprehensive action plan to make progress. It’s detailed here and I encourage everyone to read it. Here are some of the key changes:

• We will make arbitration optional for individual sexual harassment and sexual assault claims. Google has never required confidentiality in the arbitration process and arbitration still may be the best path for a number of reasons (e.g., personal privacy) but, we recognize that choice should be up to you. 
  

• We will provide more granularity around sexual harassment investigations and outcomes at the company as part of our Investigations Report.
  

• We’re revamping the way we handle and look into your concerns in three ways: We’re overhauling our reporting channels by bringing them together on one dedicated site and including live support. We will enhance the processes we use to handle concerns—including the ability for Googlers to be accompanied by a support person. And we will offer extra care and resources for Googlers during and after the process. This includes extended counseling and career support,
  

• We will update and expand our mandatory sexual harassment training. From now on if you don’t complete your training, you’ll receive a one-rating dock in Perf (editor's note: Perf is our performance review system). 
  

• We will recommit to our company-wide OKR around diversity, equity and inclusion again in 2019, focused on improving representation—through hiring, progression and retention—and creating a more inclusive culture for everyone. Our Chief Diversity Officer will continue to provide monthly progress updates to me and my leadership team. 

I hope you’ll take the time to read the full range of actions we’re announcing today.

Thank you all for the feedback you’ve shared with us. This is an area where we need to continually make progress and are committed to doing so. We often hear from Googlers that the best part of working here is other Googlers. Even in difficult times, we are encouraged by the commitment of our colleagues to create a better workplace. That’s come through very strongly over the past few weeks.

-Sundar

Image source.

Discussion:

• Analyze Pichai’s message: the audience, communication objectives, organization, writing style, etc. What works well, and what could be improved?

• Overall, how well does the message address employees’ concerns?

• Pichai mentions that privacy may be a reason employees choose the arbitration process, but the Times article says arbitration mostly protects the company’s privacy? Should Pichai have omitted this line?

• What, if any, downsides do you see of Google responding to employees’ demands in this way?

White House Tweets Doctored Video

There is no love lost, as they say, between President Trump and CNN Correspondent Jim Acosta. Now, Acosta has been suspended from the White House because of what Press Secretary Sarah Sanders described as “a reporter placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern.”

However, Sanders posted a video that Storyful compared to C-SPAN’s, and a different story emerges. In the C-SPAN version, Acosta’s hand inadvertently touches the intern’s arm. The White House version omits three frames, misleading viewers to see more aggressive touching—a “chop.”

A Wall Street Journal article and a Wired report show the videos frame by frame, side by side.

CNN posted that the news organization stands by Acosta, and Sanders tweeted that the White House stands by its decision.

Discussion:

• One theory is that the White House obtained the doctored video from InfoWars, a conservative news organization. If this is true, should the White House staff have done a better job vetting the source?

• Assuming the White House didn’t know the video was edited, what should they do or say now?

• Analyze the unedited video. What, if any, responsibility does Acosta have for the incident?

• #MicrophoneMeghan is trending. Who’s responsible for the (probably) unwanted attention?

Timing Bad-News Messages

This week, we saw two examples of timing communications to improve image.

President Trump waited until after the important mid-term elections to fire Attorney General Jeff Sessions. President Trump wasn’t happy with Sessions since he recused himself from the Russia election interference investigation back in 2017.

Although Sessions did technically “resign,” he did so at the President’s request. Sessions confirms this in his resignation letter, which begins, “At your request, I am submitting my resignation.”

Facebook capitalized on a busy news day to announce bad news: a report that the company didn’t do enough to stop anti-Rohingya propaganda on its platform. The site may have contributed to escalated violence in Myanmar. Skimm writers joked, “What to say when the midterms are dominating the headlines… Time to drop some bad news. Right, Facebook?”

FB image source.

Discussion:

• Why didn’t President Trump fire Jeff Sessions after he recused himself? Why is the timing better now, more than a year later?

• What other examples have you seen of companies taking advantage of news cycles?

• The benefits of reporting bad news on a slow news day may be obvious. What are the risks?