Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label Coke. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Coke. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 10, 2015

Muslim Woman's "Coke" Story Might Be Fraud

Is the Story of a Muslim Woman Insulted by Flight Attendant a Hoax?

The printing press should not become a social media rumor mill.

10:38 AM, JUN 9, 2015 • BY MARK HEMINGWAY
Last week, there was yet another news frenzy over something that happened on social media. A Muslim Northwestern University chaplain, Tahera Ahmad, wrote on her Facebook page that she was in "tears of humiliation from discrimination" because a flight attendant refused to give her an unopened can of soda. Ahmad claimed that she was told that this was so she couldn't use the can of soda as a weapon, and that another passenger told her, "You Moslem, you need to shut the f— up.”
Tahera Ahmad
TAHERA AHMAD
FACEBOOK
Pretty soon the story was flying around social media, and a hashtag campaign #unitedfortahera popped up. Major news outlets, such as CNN, ABC News, and theWashington Post, covered the story. The Daily Showused the whole episode as the launching point for a bitabout the allegedly rampant Islamophobia consuming America. United went into crisis PR mode, publicly apologized, and reassigned the flight attendant in question.
What's really remarkable about this story is, near as I can tell, at no point in the last week did any of these major media outlets try and independently verify the details of of Ahmad's story.

Well, according to the Savvy Stews travel website, passengers who were on board the same flight have posted messages on the Internet with very specific details about what transpired that appear to contradict Ahmad's story and portray her as the one being rude and out of line. For the record, Ahmad's story always struck me as not entirely credible for lots of reasons, including the fact that I personally have been denied an unopened Coke Zero on a flight, and as a white Christian male, this did not occur to me to be a discriminatory act. Indeed, the Savvy Stews point out that there are all sorts of logistical reasons -- e.g. there's a limited number of Coke Zeros in the small beverage carts -- why flight attendant may not be inclined or able to give someone a full can of soda.
Anyway, my hunches aside, I would like to note that what's happened with this story is a complete and total perversion of journalism. Whether it's simply for clicks or because folks are anxious enough to promote any account of injustice that reinforces the media's center-left world view, it is inexcusable to turn someone's one-sided Facebook post into a national news story without making an effort to verify the details.

The media should be chastened by their previous behavior -- they've been burned multiple times by amplifying the bountiful harvest of social media hoaxes. In 2013, a lesbian waitress in New Jersey raked in thousands in donations after the media picked up on her Facebook post that featured a photo of a receipt where her customer allegedly denied her a tip and wrote that it was because "I do not agree with your lifestyle." The whole episode turned out to have been made up by the waitress.
Accounts like these have real world consequences. The flight attendant in question has been reassigned, and who knows how this has been detrimental for her. Beyond accepting Ahmad's words at face(book) value, I have yet to see any real proof that she did anything wrong.
Finally, journalists who think that a single, unverified account left on someone's Facebook page is all they need to hang a story on ought to think long and hard about the incentives they are creating for people. Knowing that there's a good chance you can say anything and it won't be investigated and corroborated is just going to encourage a lot of people who have very unhealthy motives to aspire to be the victim du jour.
Maybe Tahera Ahmad was treated unfairly and discriminated against, but it's really appalling that the facts of what happened to her would not be established before we mess with a flight attendant's career, drag an airline through the mud, and use the episode as a launching point for a national conversation about Islamophobia.
But I guess this is what passes for "journalism" these days
.

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

No One Should Pay More Taxes Than They Are Required. Also They Should Take Advantage Of Every Tax Break They Can.

Buffett: I Won't Pay a Dime More in Taxes Than What I Have to

Tuesday, 29 Apr 2014 08:28 AM
By John Morgan
Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
|  A   A  
Warren Buffett says he will pay only what the law requires for personal taxes or for corporate taxes at his Berkshire Hathaway empire, but that does not mean he thinks the U.S. tax structure is perfect.

In a conversation with Fortune, he also addressed the tide of criticism stemming from Coke's lavish new option package for its executives, and offered a small hint about his successor at Berkshire Hathaway.

Buffett said he is not above looking for tax breaks just because he is rich.


"Actually, [Berkshire's] tax rate is pretty high if you look at it. But if it could be lower, I would have it lower. I will do anything that is basically covered by the law to reduce Berkshire's tax rate.

"For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That's the only reason to build them. They don't make sense without the tax credit."

Buffett noted he is not the only American who is not offering up his own money to help the debt-burdened United States reduce its gigantic deficits — he said Washington, D.C., leaders are not opening up their personal purse strings, either.

"I will not pay a dime more of individual taxes than I owe, and I won't pay a dime more of corporate taxes than we owe. And that's very simple. In my own case, I offered one time to match a voluntary payment that any Senators pay, and I offered to triple any voluntary payment that [Senate Minority Leader] Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., made, but they never took me up on it."

As for the Coca-Cola multi-billion dollar executive option package that has caused considerable controversy, Buffett claimed there was little he could do to stop it despite being on the Coke board and Berkshire Hathaway being one of the company's biggest investors.

Instead of voting against the option package, Buffett, who in the past has criticized overly rich executive pay, simply did not vote.

"I think we did take a stand in abstaining. That's a very loud voice coming from Berkshire. It obviously means we don't approve of the plan," he claimed.

As for stock options at Berkshire Hathaway, Buffett said he believes only the CEO should receive them — not the average employee. In making those remarks, he suggested the next CEO at his company will not be a woman.

"I actually have written — I may put it in the annual report next year — a memo to the board of directors of Berkshire as to what I think would be a sensible option plan for the CEO of Berkshire who succeeds me. And he would be — in this case it would be a he at the present time — the only one who would receive options because he would be the only one who is responsible for the overall success of the operation."

Berkshire Hathaway's much-anticipated annual meeting festivities in Omaha, Nebr., are getting underway for the main event May 3.

The reason investors hang on to every work that Buffett speaks is because he speaks plainly, with little jargon, according to the Financial Times.

"Buffett's plain speaking shows confidence, as you would expect — he has nothing to prove," the Times noted.



Related Stories:
© 2014 Moneynews. All rights reserved.