On Rupert, and self image... as well as very well comptarmentalized (guess who)

[WinOne4TheGipper]

nadinbrzezinski   (1000+ posts)             Tue Jul-19-11 09:36 PM
Original message
On Rupert, and self image... as well as very well comptarmentalized
   

 
companies.

Here I am listening to the replay, and it struck me... News Corp is so compartmentalized that indeed there is a chance that old Rupert did not know what was going on.

There are two reasons for that.

1.- When you run a company on a need to know basis... not all goes up to the top.

2.- Rupert is rumored to have run the place like a feudal empire. In this case, if you want to keep your job, how much do you tell the Emperor? I mean the Emperor might not want to hear it.

If nothing else this will be a textbook example, like Enron, of how you can sink a company... willful blindness was rampant.

And yes, this old man probably did not know all that was going on in his company... that does not excuse it. But for any of you paying attention to how business is done... textbook example... of how things can and do go wrong.

If I made such a big fool of myself on such a consistent basis, I'd take some time off...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1526585

[thundley4]

The DUmmies have been hoping Murdoch will take a fall and his empire broken up and split among the other networks. Now DUmmie nadin has to shatter those hopes with a very little bit of reality.  Murdoch will come through this and Fox will remain on the air.

[Duke Nukum]

Does anybody know where I can get the nutshell version of this? I've heard it in the news the last few days but still have no idea what it is all about.

[USA4ME]

What was going on in England w/ Murdock had nothing to do with here in the USA, but the left never figured that out.  Because the English have efectively taken private money out of politics, those pols who gain favor with their lib press have a decisive advantage, so getting rid of Murdock is the aim of the Labour Party.  Dems would like the same here, as the left always desires wherever they exist, that being the gov't regulating what can be expressed in the press.

.

[GOBUCKS]

From the best nadin thread of 2011:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x666804

nadinbrzezinski  (1000+ posts)        Wed Mar-16-11 10:09 PM
Original message
Ok I want you people to understand something right now
in a regular, every day quake, you got logistics issues... which translates into :

FOOD,
WATER
FUEL
MEDICAL SUPPLIES
TENTS.
DOGS
RESCUERS that can self maintain

yep the list familiar from many a quake and other disaster.

Here they also have people inside the exclusion zone. From a TRIAGE perspective it is not that people are afraid to go in there to get them. Just that going in will get more people killed... now or later... really does not matter.

As an Emergency Worker it gets to the point that you have to give up... and it might seem cruel... given thousands are still in the zone from what I can read... but this is the reality of it.

leftstreet  (1000+ posts)        Wed Mar-16-11 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. What makes you think we didn't already understand this?

  

bobbolink  (1000+ posts)        Wed Mar-16-11 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. we plebes are hopelessly ignorant, and depend on mommy and daddy to set us straight.

Whisp  (1000+ posts)      Wed Mar-16-11 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. I think the OP would save more lives if she went shopping for milk
and left us alone for 10 minutes. It's getting critical mass, where's the *******ed ledge.

anneboleyn (1000+ posts)      Wed Mar-16-11 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #4
30. Amen, She posts these to "inform" us "ignorant" folks every time any event
happens which remotely justifies such a post.

Brickbat  (1000+ posts)      Wed Mar-16-11 10:37 PM
Original message
NO!!! Learning cannot take place without arrogance, ahems, and bad grammar.
It's that simple.

[CC27]

nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list    Tue Jul-19-11 09:36 PM
Original message
On Rupert, and self image... as well as very well comptarmentalized
   
companies.

Here I am listening to the replay, and it struck me... News Corp is so compartmentalized that indeed there is a chance that old Rupert did not know what was going on.

There are two reasons for that.

1.- When you run a company on a need to know basis... not all goes up to the top.

2.- Rupert is rumored to have run the place like a feudal empire. In this case, if you want to keep your job, how much do you tell the Emperor? I mean the Emperor might not want to hear it.

If nothing else this will be a textbook example, like Enron, of how you can sink a company... willful blindness was rampant.

And yes, this old man probably did not know all that was going on in his company... that does not excuse it. But for any of you paying attention to how business is done... textbook example... of how things can and do go wrong.

Please tell me more oh google one. 

Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list    Tue Jul-19-11 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
4. Rupert gave the game away when he said they didn't investigate
   
any of the obvious illegalities like bribing police, that it never occurred to him to do so. If he didn't approve them specifically, he certainly gave his tacit approval after the fact by not investigating why people thought breaking the law was a good idea.

Fish rot from the head down and so, apparently, has Rupert's organization.

nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list    Tue Jul-19-11 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Oh absolutely but the lesson here is
   
running this the way it was leads to ENRON like problems... as we saw.

It also puts a lie to something else, he is suposed to be a hands on person... in a smaller company probably he was... also 20 years ago, or forty. A company this size is like running a country. It opens a whole slew of different cans and puts a lie to the too big to fail canard.

By the way, monopolies are bad... which is the other thing this is a textbook example off. Enron was, to a lesser degree

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1526585

[GOBUCKS]

nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list    Tue Jul-19-11 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #4
By the way, monopolies are bad... which is the other thing this is a textbook example off[sic].

Uh oh, I feel a lesson on the Sherman Antitrust Act coming!

Of course, how News Corp. is a textbook example "off" a monopoly is a mystery,
but I'm sure we'll get a lecture on that.

[Rebel]

bobbolink  (1000+ posts)        Wed Mar-16-11 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. we plebes are hopelessly ignorant, and depend on mommy and daddy to set us straight.

Thanks for admitting what we already knew, Ms. 'I want my free home now!'.

[DumbAss Tanker]

Murdoch, Fox, and Newscorp are going to come out of this just fine, some of the News of the World staff will be going down for it but 90% of the organization will be back under a different banner within three months.  Suck on it, DUmmies.