Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FedEx responds to The New York Times article from Nov. 17, 2019

about.van.fedex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 321 posts

Re: FedEx responds to The New York Times article from Nov. 17, 2019

#111

Post by CamperBob2 »

adamrezich wrote: post #69
wang_li wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whataboutism is justifying one party's actions by pointing at another party and saying "they do it too." This isn't that. Fedex is saying that they do a lot more for the national economy that the NYT. They pay more in taxes, they invest more in assets, etc.

Why is this even up for debate? Why would anyone think that the NYT is more useful to the economy than FedEx? Why do people continue to put ""journalism"" on such a high pedestal? Like, what actual value did the NYT article produce? At worst it could have potentially negatively affected the FedEx stock price and overall popular perception, for no good reason other than to generate clicks/ad views.

Why would anyone think that the NYT is more useful to the economy than FedEx?

Here's one point of view that doesn't come up as often as it should: the First Amendment doesn't say anything about churches that it doesn't also say about the press. Yet we don't tax churches on the grounds that "the power to tax is the power to destroy." [1]

If it weren't for this double standard, the Times would indeed be justified in paying zero tax.

[1]: http://www.catholic365.com/article/1992/faith-of-our-fathers...

Re: FedEx responds to The New York Times article from Nov. 17, 2019

#112

Post by zaroth »

Someone1234 wrote: post #85
Consultant32452 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is it isn't journalism, it's activism. People say corporate media is biased, but I think that falls short. It's not simply biased, it has an agenda. "Company follows tax laws" is not news. Whatever any individual company pays in taxes is not news unless there's criminal fraud of some sort. So it's completely fair to call them out in this way.

> The problem is it isn't journalism, it's activism. The two aren't mutually exclusive. Journalists have an ethical responsibility to be honest, but outside of that there's nothing to say that a journalist cannot have a set of beliefs that shape their worldview. In this case you aren't really accusing the NYT of being dishonest, you're saying that their honest opinion isn't ok because you have a different opinion (or…

The difference between the NYT having an opinion and me having an opinion is that only the NYT is protected against lawsuits for libel with a special standard of “actual malice” by the contorted reasoning that anyone they chose to publish an article on must therefore be a public figure.

IANAL, but a good example of this is the coverage of the Covington High School students.

Re: FedEx responds to The New York Times article from Nov. 17, 2019

#113

Post by wavefunction »

adamrezich wrote: post #76
slg wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They aren't disputing the facts. I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion. The first sentence says the story is "distorted and factually incorrect" and they later call it an "outrageous distortion of the truth". This statement is screaming "fake news" and "debate me" like some Twitter troll. It is crazy to see this as an official statement from a Fortune 100 company.

>It is crazy to see this as an official statement from a Fortune 100 company. No it's not—the era of "journalists" being de facto arbiters of truth is most definitely over.

There was never an era like that, it's more nonsense and outright propaganda from schemers who want to claim that their own free-style lies are just as valid as formal journalism.

Re: FedEx responds to The New York Times article from Nov. 17, 2019

#115

Post by crazygringo »

lstroud wrote: post #65
CPLX wrote: post #25

This is stupid. The NY Times, as a business, wasn't a subject of the article. It's not a competition between a media company and a shipping company. It's a piece of journalism. Either that journalism is accurate or it isn't. If it's wrong they should issue a correction, or review how it could be misleading or slanted and offer an alternate perspective. If it's correct they should stand by it. In no event does the wri…

Sounds like they just want equal footing for responding to accusations. I hope it happens. It would be entertaining.

FedEx is a $40 billion company -- eight times the size of the NYT. They already have equal footing, and are responding right now, which is why we're reading about it. Only with zero specifics of what they claim the NYT is inaccurate on.

So... neither substantive nor particularly entertaining. :(

Re: FedEx responds to The New York Times article from Nov. 17, 2019

#116

Post by atombender »

malvosenior wrote: post #78

I'm much, much more concerned about The New York Times deceptively pushing a political agenda during an election year than I am about FedEx legally paying as few taxes as possible. We all do that every tax season! It seems like the real story is how the NYT is actively campaigning for the DNC and I'm glad FedEx is calling them out.

NYT has been publishing articles about big corporations evading taxes for many years, including during the Obama administration. This is not new, and it's part of the NYT's social agenda, not the election year.

Here are some examples:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/business/economy/corporat...

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/business/apples-tax-strat...

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/01/business/yesterday-outrag...

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/business/apple-avoided-bi...

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/06/us/panama-papers.html

Re: FedEx responds to The New York Times article from Nov. 17, 2019

#117

Post by adamrezich »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #111
adamrezich wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this even up for debate? Why would anyone think that the NYT is more useful to the economy than FedEx? Why do people continue to put ""journalism"" on such a high pedestal? Like, what actual value did the NYT article produce? At worst it could have potentially negatively affected the FedEx stock price and overall popular perception, for no good reason other than to generate clicks/ad views.

Why would anyone think that the NYT is more useful to the economy than FedEx? Here's one point of view that doesn't come up as often as it should: the First Amendment doesn't say anything about churches that it doesn't also say about the press. Yet we don't tax churches on the grounds that "the power to tax is the power to destroy." [1] If it weren't for this double standard, the Times would indeed be justified in pa…

I'd be fine with that as long as we get to start referring to "journalists" as priests or clergymen or whatever, at least then things would be a bit more honest.

Re: FedEx responds to The New York Times article from Nov. 17, 2019

#118

Post by pcroh »

crazygringo wrote: post #115
lstroud wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like they just want equal footing for responding to accusations. I hope it happens. It would be entertaining.

FedEx is a $40 billion company -- eight times the size of the NYT. They already have equal footing, and are responding right now, which is why we're reading about it. Only with zero specifics of what they claim the NYT is inaccurate on. So... neither substantive nor particularly entertaining. :(

How many people will read the NYT article compared to this blog post? They don't have equal footing.

Re: FedEx responds to The New York Times article from Nov. 17, 2019

#119

Post by ceejayoz »

mc32 wrote: post #5
sarcasmatwork wrote: post #2

Expected behavior coming from New York Times. Good on Fedex for pushing back.

You’d think they’d have their house in order before besmirching someone else... good on FedEx calling them out.

Their house is in order. From the original article:

> The public face of its lobbying effort, which included a tax proposal of its own, was FedEx’s founder and chief executive, Frederick Smith, who repeatedly took to the airwaves to champion the power of tax cuts. “If you make the United States a better place to invest, there is no question in my mind that we would see a renaissance of capital investment,” he said on an August 2017 radio show hosted by Larry Kudlow, who is now chairman of the National Economic Council.

FedEx lobbied for these cuts, and argued they'd invest more capital if they were made reality. They got what they wanted, and didn't do what they said.

The NYT wasn't lobbying in this fashion.

Re: FedEx responds to The New York Times article from Nov. 17, 2019

#120

Post by malvosenior »

atombender wrote: post #116
malvosenior wrote: post #78

I'm much, much more concerned about The New York Times deceptively pushing a political agenda during an election year than I am about FedEx legally paying as few taxes as possible. We all do that every tax season! It seems like the real story is how the NYT is actively campaigning for the DNC and I'm glad FedEx is calling them out.

NYT has been publishing articles about big corporations evading taxes for many years, including during the Obama administration. This is not new, and it's part of the NYT's social agenda, not the election year. Here are some examples: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/business/economy/corporat... https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/business/apples-tax-strat... https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/01/business/yesterday-out…

I wonder if it really is a "social" agenda vs. something else. They clearly do have some sort of agenda though, and while they no doubt always publish articles through that lens, I'd say they crank it up on election years, especially post-Trump.
Post reply on HN