Honest question: Why is Holmes still CEO?
IIRC Holmes designed the Theranos bylaws such that only she herself can elect to replace the CEO.
Major Investor Sues Theranos
131–140 of 234 posts
Re: Major Investor Sues Theranos
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's entirely appropriate for the supporting photographs to support the article, but that's not what the parent is questioning. If the news is based on facts, then the facts can speak for themselves. An unflattering photo does not support the article if the article is not related to how well the subject takes photos.
So no photo is the way to go? Unless the article is about taking photos?
I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. I just took issue with the suggestion that an unflattering picture somehow supports an article about shady business practices.
Re: Major Investor Sues Theranos
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the point though is how far away is that from Musk?
The answer is "extremely far, so it's not sensible to compare them." It's perfectly fine to say "We are going to attempt to build something, here's our plan" and then fail. It's completely unacceptable to say "We have something" when you don't. The only way Theranos could be analogous to Musk is if he had got up on that stage in Guadalajara and said "we have a Mars rocket ready to go, we've tested it extensively, it…
[deleted]
Re: Major Investor Sues Theranos
#134Isn't her activity like the textbook definition of fraud? Not to mention the dude who she basically pushed into committing suicide. I hope she gets at least as much time as Madoff.
What Madoff did was illegal and malicious from the outset. Do you believe that when Holmes was handed the opportunity, at 19, to bring the Edison to market that she set out with the intent of defrauding investors? The only thing she's provably guilty of thus far is believing in her company a little more than is sensible and being preternaturally competent as a fundraiser. When Musk claims he can get people to Mars fo…
The examples you are comparing are not similar at all.
Musk should be collecting money for the situation to be similar.
>being preternaturally competent as a fundraiser.
Why are you trying put a positive spin on this whole mess like a PR agency ? What would you describe Madoff as in that case ? A man of great persuasive ability ?
Re: Major Investor Sues Theranos
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that Madoff's intent was criminal from the outset and that Holmes' probably wasn't is irrelevant. The point is that it became criminal. And that's why she's in the firing line today.
At what point did she shift from being an optimistic entrepeneur to a criminal? Was it when she started getting magazine covers? Was it when Hwnry Kissinger joined the board of directors? She's still giving her company 110% in spite of everything that has transpired. Usually the correct time for a startup founder/CEO to call it quits is when they run out of capital, until then it's their job to try and make it work c…
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/09/elizabeth-holmes-ther...
Read this article.
Re: Major Investor Sues Theranos
#136One thing I find really weird is the choice of CEO photos in media reporting. If there is good news, they chose 'nice', attractive photos. If there is bad news, they look for worse ones. This is true for male and female founders. In this case, everything about this photo is an 'outtake', from hands, choice of framing, facial expression, eyes - it's a photo a photographer would not keep in their image selection.
Why is that weird? The photo choice manipulates the reader impression just as they intend. Perhaps what you might mean is something like "disingenuous" or "biased" or "unethical"
As a journalist, I disagree. In this case the technique is used more to portray the way Holmes is perceived publicly (a "neurotic and delusional powerful woman out of control" -- not my opinion, just what the photo conveys), than to add a spin to a story that's already independently and factually spun in a very clear direction.
The use FoxNews does of this photo-picking with President Obama or liberal politicians is much worse. Or check the tabloids, they're masters at that.
This one? Just fine. I also want to point out that the picture is all but an outtake. Photography agencies publish photos like this on their online collections all the time, they won't discard them. Exactly because they know outlets may pick them for a story where they would fit.
Re: Major Investor Sues Theranos
#137One thing I find really weird is the choice of CEO photos in media reporting. If there is good news, they chose 'nice', attractive photos. If there is bad news, they look for worse ones. This is true for male and female founders. In this case, everything about this photo is an 'outtake', from hands, choice of framing, facial expression, eyes - it's a photo a photographer would not keep in their image selection.
Photo choice is one of the most effective editorial tools a publication has. For example, do they show a photo of the person as a child, wearing a suit, or casual clothes posed with a weapon? Each is technically the same person, but all will prejudice your view towards the subject.
This photo from Bloomberg photographer David Paul Morris has been used in several dozen stories about Theranos over the last 11 plus months.
Sometimes HN tries to be too clever and I don't mean to direct that at you but basically every sibling and cousin comment in this subthread.
HN Challenge: next Theranos thread don't upvote comments about CEO's appearance.
Re: Major Investor Sues Theranos
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alternately, it reflects the tenor of the story and the facts it contains. You could say this is inappropriate editorializing, but that makes the obviously absurd implication that fraud is a neutral thing, and that there are many good kinds of fraud in additional to the bad ones. If you're reporting clear facts about something unambiguously bad, then it's entirely appropriate for the supporting photographs to support…
It's entirely appropriate for the supporting photographs to support the article, but that's not what the parent is questioning. If the news is based on facts, then the facts can speak for themselves. An unflattering photo does not support the article if the article is not related to how well the subject takes photos.
If facts could speak for themselves you wouldn't need journalists to put them into words, photojournalists to render them in pictures, editors to package stories, and publishers to deliver them to millions.
Of course it's important for the people in that process to be judicious and scrupulous about their handling of the facts so they can deliver material that provides reliable impressions. But showing unflattering pictures of people found to have done seriously unflattering things isn't some egregious departure from these requirements. Indeed, to the extent that a picture can say a thousand words, it's a useful - and generally appreciated - bit of data compression.
Re: Major Investor Sues Theranos
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it's a photo a photographer would not keep in their image selection. Yep. And I wonder what David Paul Morris [1] thinks of having his work used in this manner. It doesn't reflect well upon him as a photographer that's for sure. [1] http://davidpaulmorris.com/
Er...why wouldn't it reflect well on him? The caption for the photo attributes it to him and the Bloomberg News, which means: 1. It's part of the Bloomberg News catalog 2. It may have been published on Bloomberg's own stories of Theranos. 3. WSJ had to pay for the right to use that photo. How would any of those things reflect badly on the photographer?
You forgot:
4. It's a horrible photograph that makes the photographer look incompetent.
Re: Major Investor Sues Theranos
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would suck if you made financial decisions based on falsified documents.
How hard do you have to lie in order to pass the due diligence required for a $100m investment?
This is easy to do if you doctor documents, indeed the only reason straight up forgery isn't done more often are the legal ramifications discussed here.