• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Люди755
      • Показать ещё
      Компании903
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации61
      • Показать ещё
      Издания306
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы516
      • Показать ещё
      Разное412
      • Показать ещё
      Формат47
      Показатели19
      • Показать ещё
      Сферы1
Политика
Русские со всего мира собрались в Крыму  Участники III Международного Ливадийского форума обсудили поворотные моменты нашей истории По залам Воронцовского дворца в Алупке прогуливались двое «иностранцев»: граф Шереметев и князь Трубецкой. Оба —граждане Франции. Их предки эмигрировали из России в годы революции, однако порвать с родиной не смогли.  Сегодня Петр Шереметев — почётный председатель Международного совета российских соотечественников. Александр Трубецкой — руководитель «Франко-российского альянса». Они приехали в Крым, чтобы принять участие в проходящем в эти дни под патронатом председателя Совета Федерации Валентины Матвиенко III Международном Ливадийском форуме.  Русская головоломка «Концепция Русского мира: поворотные моменты истории», — так называлась, пожалуй, самая представительная секция форума, работавшая в легендарном Воронцовском дворце, стены которого помнят многих великих, включая премьер-министра Великобритании Уинстона Черчилля — в дни Ялтинской конференции 1945 года здесь размещалась британская делегация. «Предсказать, как поведёт себя Россия, —невозможно, это всегда загадка, больше того —головоломка, нет — тайна за семью печатями», — говорил знаменитый британец. Разгадать эту загадку оказалось не под силу и его политическим наследникам, не ожидавшим, что Россия вопреки воле «международного сообщества» придёт в 2014 году на помощь крымчанам и вновь вернёт себе полуостров в соответствии с объективной исторической реальностью.  Крым сегодня лучшее место на планете для того, чтобы попытаться понять, что такое этот самый загадочный Русский мир, Русская идея, какова вообще роль России в современном мире.
Русские со всего мира собрались в Крыму Участники III Международного Ливадийского форума обсудили поворотные моменты нашей истории По залам Воронцовского дворца в Алупке прогуливались двое «иностранцев»: граф Шереметев и князь Трубецкой. Оба —граждане Франции. Их предки эмигрировали из России в годы революции, однако порвать с родиной не смогли. Сегодня Петр Шереметев — почётный председатель Международного совета российских соотечественников. Александр Трубецкой — руководитель «Франко-российского альянса». Они приехали в Крым, чтобы принять участие в проходящем в эти дни под патронатом председателя Совета Федерации Валентины Матвиенко III Международном Ливадийском форуме. Русская головоломка «Концепция Русского мира: поворотные моменты истории», — так называлась, пожалуй, самая представительная секция форума, работавшая в легендарном Воронцовском дворце, стены которого помнят многих великих, включая премьер-министра Великобритании Уинстона Черчилля — в дни Ялтинской конференции 1945 года здесь размещалась британская делегация. «Предсказать, как поведёт себя Россия, —невозможно, это всегда загадка, больше того —головоломка, нет — тайна за семью печатями», — говорил знаменитый британец. Разгадать эту загадку оказалось не под силу и его политическим наследникам, не ожидавшим, что Россия вопреки воле «международного сообщества» придёт в 2014 году на помощь крымчанам и вновь вернёт себе полуостров в соответствии с объективной исторической реальностью. Крым сегодня лучшее место на планете для того, чтобы попытаться понять, что такое этот самый загадочный Русский мир, Русская идея, какова вообще роль России в современном мире.
Выбор редакции
29 июня, 17:45

Murdoch takeover bid for Sky delayed for extra scrutiny

Britain’s government stalled Twenty-First Century Fox’s takeover of the Sky pay television and broadband network Thursday after regulators said the deal could give Rupert Murdoch and his family too much influence over the country’s media.

Выбор редакции
29 июня, 16:19

Concerns Fox's Sky bid gives Murdoch 'too much power'

Britain intends to refer Rupert Murdoch's takeover of Sky to a full investigation because the deal raises concerns about the amount of influence the media mogul would wield. As Kate King reports, 21st Century Fox has until the 14th of July to convince the government otherwise. Subscribe: http://smarturl.it/reuterssubscribe More updates and breaking news: http://smarturl.it/BreakingNews Reuters tells the world's stories like no one else. As the largest international multimedia news provider, Reuters provides coverage around the globe and across topics including business, financial, national, and international news. For over 160 years, Reuters has maintained its reputation for speed, accuracy, and impact while providing exclusives, incisive commentary and forward-looking analysis. http://reuters.com/ https://www.facebook.com/Reuters https://plus.google.com/u/0/s/reuters https://twitter.com/Reuters

29 июня, 14:34

Британия решила отложить покупку Sky Рупертом Мердоком

Правительство Великобритании заявило о намерении передать заявку владельца компании 21st Century Fox Руперта Мердока о покупке британского телеканала Sky Plc отраслевому регулятору, сообщает агентство Bloomberg. Сумма предполагаемой ...

Выбор редакции
29 июня, 14:24

Sky-Fox takeover deal likely to face competition probe

Culture secretary is "minded to" refer Rupert Murdoch's 21st Century Fox takeover of Sky to the competition authority.

Выбор редакции
29 июня, 14:20

Murdoch's Sky bid likely to be referred to competition authorities

Culture secretary Karen Bradley announces decision after Ofcom warns of potential for Murdoch to ‘influence the overall news agenda’Rupert Murdoch’s plans for the £11.7bn takeover of Sky have been set back after the culture secretary accepted there were serious concerns over handing him and his family “increased influence over the UK news agenda and the political process”.Karen Bradley told the Commons that she accepted a recommendation from Ofcom to call in the Competition and Markets Authority to conduct a further six-month examination of the deal because of the “material influence” that the Murdoch family would have as a result. Continue reading...

Выбор редакции
29 июня, 14:13

Sky-Fox takeover deal likely to face competition probe

Culture secretary is "minded to" refer Rupert Murdoch's 21st Century Fox takeover of Sky to the competition authority.

Выбор редакции
29 июня, 14:09

Major setback for Murdoch's $15 billion Sky deal

Rupert Murdoch's attempt to build out his media empire in Europe by buying pay-TV group Sky suffered a major setback on Thursday.

Выбор редакции
29 июня, 11:47

UK government delays Murdoch takeover of Sky

Britain’s government stalled Twenty-First Century Fox’s takeover bid of the Sky pay television and broadband network Thursday after media regulators expressed concern about the influence of Rupert Murdoch and his family.

Выбор редакции
29 июня, 11:18

Government agrees to fund abortions in England for Northern Ireland women to avert Commons defeat - Politics live

Rolling coverage of the day’s political developments as they happen 2.21pm BST Here are the key points from the Greening letter. (See 2.13pm.) 2.13pm BST And here is the full text of the letter - with the second page.Full letter here from @JustineGreening to MPs committing to funding abortion for Northern Irish women in England pic.twitter.com/AFKjIsFvuM Continue reading...

Выбор редакции
28 июня, 03:18

Ink review – James Graham's riveting account of the birth of the Sun

Almeida theatre, LondonFirst-rate drama about Rupert Murdoch’s move into British newspapers in the 1960s gives us no sermons about press ethics ‘People like stories.” So says Rupert Murdoch in James Graham’s new play about the birth of the Sun. And what makes this such a good and gripping piece of theatre is that it doesn’t preach us sermons about press ethics but leaves us to draw our own conclusions from the known facts. It strikes me as a first-rate play about newspapers in the honourable tradition of Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur’s The Front Page. Continue reading...

Выбор редакции
27 июня, 16:29

Sky Sports to replace numbered channels and slash prices in revamp

Broadcaster to launch themed channels for football, golf and cricket, with cheapest package costing £18 a monthSky is scrapping its numbered sports channels and replacing them with themed offerings focused on specific sports – led by football, golf and cricket – as it combats falling viewer numbers with a branding revamp and a cheaper viewing package. The retirement of Sky Sports 1,2,3,4 and 5 and the introduction of a new package two-thirds cheaper than current prices represents a major shakeup of the strategy that has made Rupert Murdoch’s Sky a pay-TV powerhouse. Continue reading...

Выбор редакции
27 июня, 15:32

Власти Ирландии одобрили покупку Twenty-First Century Fox телекомпании Sky за $14,6 млрд

Министерство коммуникаций, климата и окружающей среды Ирландии одобрило во вторник покупку принадлежащей медиамагнату Руперту Мердоку компанией Twenty-First Century Fox британской телекомпании Sky Plc за 11,7 миллиарда фунтов стерлингов (14,6 миллиарда долларов), говорится в релизе Twenty-First Century Fox.

Выбор редакции
26 июня, 21:59

The Guardian view on Murdoch’s Sky plan: a blow to media plurality | Editorial

We need to recover faith in the scrutinising pressure of a truly independent, diverse media. Concentrating more power in the hands of a rightwing billionaire won’t helpElected politicians traditionally shied away from picking fights with wealthy media moguls, wary of those who could spill barrelfuls of ink in defence of their arguments. There was a tendency for governments to raise little more than an eyebrow when media takeovers were proposed. This was a bad thing for democracy, leading to a concentration of power in the hands of a few very rich men. This process has been exacerbated in recent years by a digital revolution which has undermined traditional forms of media. All this should have changed with the revelations of phone hacking and the exposure by the Leveson inquiry of the unhealthily close relationship between politicians and the media. The test of just how different things are will come this week when culture secretary Karen Bradley announces what should happen to the proposed purchase by media conglomerate 21st Century Fox, effectively controlled by the Murdoch family, of the remaining 61% of Sky, the pan-European broadcaster, that it does not already own.Mrs Bradley should at the very least refer the £11.7bn bid to the Competition and Markets Authority to allow for a six-month investigation to take place into media diversity. The broadcasting regulator Ofcom identified the need to promote “plurality and preventing undue influence by any one media owner”. If this deal went through then the Murdochs would control a third of the paid-for newspaper circulation, one of two 24-hour news channels, a sizeable amount of radio news and a popular news website. Linking Fox content to Sky’s distribution network – which encompasses set-top boxes, a landline broadband and mobile network – it will have a storehouse of personal data and the ability to understand what its users are viewing on television, online at home and when out roaming. The door is being opened to shape the media consumption habits of millions of Britons without them probably ever knowing about it. With such power, one would expect, comes responsibility. Instead the Murdoch empire undermines the BBC and describes vital impartiality rules as “an impingement on freedom of speech”. There’s enough evidence to contradict Rupert Murdoch’s assertion that he has “made it a principle all my life never to ask for anything from any prime minister”. As his own lieutenants have made clear over Brexit, Mr Murdoch’s media is about power. Continue reading...

Выбор редакции
25 июня, 17:57

Murdoch's Sky takeover bid: culture secretary's verdict due this week

Some analysts believe Ofcom’s investigation into £11.7bn deal has raised concerns but suspect it will get green light six years after earlier bid’s failureRupert Murdoch is about to learn whether the government has cleared his latest bid to buy Sky or whether concerns about competition could yet derail the deal.The culture secretary, Karen Bradley, will this week deliver her verdict on whether to greenlight 21st Century Fox’s proposed £11.7bn takeover of the satellite broadcaster, or refer the deal to the competition authorities for further scrutiny. Continue reading...

Выбор редакции
23 июня, 17:19

Bertie Carvel: 'His speciality is making monsters and demons understood'

The actor’s former creations include a psychopathic teacher and an adulterous husband. Now the son of a former Guardian journalist is to play Rupert Murdoch in a new play, InkAs the son, grandson and great-grandson of admired British newspaper reporters, Bertie Carvel was at high risk of ending up in journalism. He ran from the family tree by going to drama school, but blood has a way of coming out and Carvel will next week continue his rise to the heights of his profession by playing one of the most significant figures in the business he escaped: Rupert Murdoch in Ink, a new stage play by James Graham that dramatises the Australian tycoon’s launch of the Sun in 1969.For Carvel, it is the latest in a string of characters that the audience may feel tempted to find unsympathetic. Previous creations include Miss Trunchbull, the psychopathic schoolmistress in the musical version of Roald Dahl’s Matilda, which made Carvel’s name in London and on Broadway, and Simon Foster, the corrupt and adulterous husband of the GP title character in Doctor Foster, a five-part BBC1 psychological thriller that returns for a second series later this year. Continue reading...

23 июня, 09:30

Men, we need to talk about sperm | Geeta Nargund

Stories of older celebrity fathers belie the truth. There is a male biological clock, and we have to break the taboo around itInfertility has for far too long been treated as an all-female issue. Yet in about half of the cases for the one in six couples in this country who are experiencing problems conceiving, it is the man’s infertility that is the problem. So why is it in my fertility clinic practices – both NHS and private – I meet men every week who have no idea of the vital role their age and lifestyle choices will play in whether they and their partner can have a healthy baby.Reports about celebrity fathers in their 50s, 60s and older, have blinded many men to the reality that they, too, have a biological clock. For every Ronnie Wood or Rupert Murdoch fathering a child in their 60s or 70s, there are many, many more men like the barrister who came to me, a widower with grownup children who was desperate to start a new chapter in life. Continue reading...

23 июня, 00:06

Брекзит, год спустя. Что референдум о выходе из ЕС дал британцам

Эксперт о том, что спустя год после решения на референдуме по выходу Великобритании из Евросоюза ситуация еще больше запуталась.

Выбор редакции
22 июня, 19:51

Rupert Murdoch and Jerry Hall go for a cinema night in Hackney – and get a good old-fashioned East End welcome

How lovely of the media mogul to accompany his wife to the premiere of her new film. Pity not all the locals were charmed“You take someone to the airport, it’s clearly the beginning of a relationship,” observes Billy Crystal in When Harry Met Sally. “That’s why I have never taken anyone to the airport at the beginning of a relationship … Because eventually things move on and you don’t take someone to the airport and I never wanted anyone to say to me: ‘How come you never take me to the airport any more?’”And so to Rupert Murdoch and Jerry Hall, who are still at the accompanying-your-wife-to-lefty-movies-about-homelessness stage of their relationship. Last year, you will recall, the News Corp boss married Jerry, and the relationship is no less giddy now he is in his 87th year. How else to interpret Rupert’s decision to accompany his wife to an event at the East End film festival last week? The couple attended the Hackney Picturehouse premiere of The Forgotten Man, in which Jerry has a brief cameo, and which is described as an honest, black-and-white representation of economic divides. Rupert’s verdict on the work is unknown – I imagine the only words he spoke all night were a brisk “Keep the engine running” to the driver of his Range Rover. But organisers are more optimistic. Continue reading...

22 июня, 17:54

Wall Street Journal Reporters Demand Action On Newsroom Diversity

The Wall Street Journal’s staff is about as diverse as the business world the paper covers: It’s essentially run by white men. A few star women have risen and departed over the years. And people of color are essentially missing from the top ranks. The situation is growing increasingly intolerable for Journal staffers, who say journalism at the paper that media mogul Rupert Murdoch owns is suffering from the overwhelming homogeneity of the newsroom. Earlier this month, a half-dozen female reporters at the outlet emailed Editor-in-Chief Gerard Baker and his deputy Matt Murray on behalf of nearly 200 staffers, expressing their growing frustration. The email, obtained by HuffPost, pointedly notes that the leadership hasn’t meaningfully addressed two related issues: the significant pay gap between men and women, and the lack of racial diversity. “Until our leadership reflects a more diverse population ― the population we are trying to attract as new subscribers ― we may not be producing the best journalism possible,” the email reads. The revelations about turmoil inside the Journal come as the paper is reeling from an ethics scandal. On Wednesday, the paper fired a prominent foreign affairs reporter for ethical violations that The Associated Press uncovered. "Diversity is such an issue at the Journal, I’ve heard people call it White Castle,” says one reporter. The June email landed in Baker’s inbox just days before the Journal reporters’ union issued a detailed report on pay at the paper. The report concluded that women in the union make less than men across the board, even accounting for experience, location and job title. Female reporters earn an average of 91 cents for every dollar their male counterparts make. The disparity widens when you consider all the women in the union ― including non-managerial staff in sales, tech and other areas. They make 87 percent of what men earn. The timing of the email was coincidental, the Journal insiders told HuffPost, but the report has created a greater sense of urgency inside the newsroom. (Full disclosure: This reporter was an editor at the Journal from 2006-2011.) The note (which you can read in full below) comes just a few months after the departure of the paper’s highest-ranking female editorial leader: Rebecca Blumenstein, who left to take a leadership position at The New York Times. That was a blow to the newsroom and particularly to women who viewed her as a champion and role model, Journal staffers told HuffPost.  The Journal reporters who spoke to HuffPost asked that their names not be published due to concern for how their superiors would consider their views. “People are scared,” said one female reporter who saw the most recent email. “There’s frustration and concern this isn’t being taken seriously.” A spokesman from the Journal did not respond to HuffPost’s requests for comment. Baker put off the reporters in an emailed response to their note. “I will take some time to respond in greater length seriatim to your various points, many of which have great validity,” he wrote back four days later. Baker has a well-known penchant for using 25-cent words. “Seriatim” means taking each point one by one. “For now, we are right in the final stages of nailing down the new newsroom leadership structure and I should be in position to make some announcements about this by early July,” he continued. In addition, staffers say that Baker hasn’t seemed sympathetic to concerns about diversity, despite taking some minor action on pay equity. “Diversity is such an issue at the Journal, I’ve heard people call it White Castle,” said the female reporter. “There’s frustration [they’re] not taking this seriously.” In the email, the reporters cited two recent stories that missed the mark precisely because of a lack of diversity: A page-one article about Target’s policy on bathrooms and transgender people in April quoted someone who linked transgender people and sexual predators. The story, which presumably went through the Journal’s rigorous editing process, failed to note that there is no evidence of such a connection. A May feature about how hard it is for college athletes to get jobs at Wall Street firms, failed to note initially the athletes were almost always men. “A (female) reporter brought the omission  to the attention of the Standards team. The fix required just two words, but meant a world of difference,” the reporters write in the email to Baker. Over the past year, the Journal has been often criticized for its coverage of the Trump administration and accused of going too easy on the president. Baker, a former conservative columnist, has personally caught a lot of flack for his remarks on Trump ― notably explaining his reluctance to label false statements from the president “lies.” In a memo to staff earlier this year, Baker asked reporters to avoid writing “Muslim-majority countries” when referring to the countries initially included under Trump’s travel ban. “Would be less loaded to say ‘seven countries the US has designated as being states that pose significant or elevated risks of terrorism,’” Baker wrote in the email, according to a BuzzFeed report. The lack of diversity needs to be tackled head-on if the Journal really wants to do great work, said one nonwhite male staffer who saw the email and signed an earlier, similar note to Baker in March. “The situation has been allowed to fester,” he said. The newsroom is not overtly racist, this staffer hastened to add, saying he has no personal beef here. None of the reporters or editors HuffPost spoke to believe this is a situation involving conscious racism or sexism. Still, the editors in charge are clearly hiring and promoting people they feel comfortable with ― other white guys. “If all the leadership positions are white men, we are missing important perspective on events of the day because we’re seeing it through one lens, whether people intend it or not,” the nonwhite staffer said. Of the 12 deputy managing editors at the top who serve under Baker and his deputy Murray, eight are white men and four are women. Two of the women work on operational issues, meaning they don’t directly handle coverage. Both of the editors who oversee the Journal’s notoriously conservative opinion page are white men. The Wall Street Journal is hardly the only newsroom in America that’s dominated by white men or that underpays women, but what’s unique here seems to be its leaders’ apparent unwillingness to grapple with the issue, and the direct way the paper’s staff and union are confronting it. The executive editor of The New York Times, Dean Baquet, who is African-American, acknowledged the paper’s own diversity issues in a piece the Times published last year. The article, by the paper’s former public editor, noted that of the 20 or so reporters who covered the Trump campaign, only two were black and none were Latino or Asian. “That’s less diversity than you’ll find in Donald Trump’s cabinet thus far,” Liz Spayd wrote. She criticized the Times for not doing more about mixing it up. “We’re not diverse enough,” Baquet said at the time. “But I think they’d say I have a commitment to it and that it’s gotten better in the past year.” He added that his effort to diversify the Times had been “intense and persistent.” Eighty percent of the Journal’s staff is white, according to a 2016 survey conducted by the American Society of News Editors. The New York Times is 78 percent white. The Washington Post is at 69 percent. At all three outlets, women journalists write fewer than half of the A-section stories, according to a separate report. (HuffPost’s union has not yet done a salary review, but plans to perform one sometime next year. HuffPost management has not yet released official diversity numbers.) The June email to Baker and Murray followed up on a longer March email, signed by 197 reporters and other staffers, who pleaded with Baker and Murray to consider a more intentional strategy when it comes to diversity. That email laid out specific suggestion for management. Some points were strikingly similar to those recommended recently by former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who conducted a thorough internal review of ride-hailing firm Uber’s internal culture. For example, the writers asked the Journal editors to consider implementing the so-called Rooney rule, which calls for at least one minority member and one woman to be considered for every job opening. The reporters also asked that more effort be made to hire women into leadership roles, that a thorough salary review be undertaken and shared with staff and that managers get more training on how to assess reporters’ career paths ― an effort to dispel the notion, for example, that women who are mothers wouldn’t want to take on breaking news roles. Baker responded just a few hours later that day. ”I appreciate the seriousness of all these issues and I look forward to discussing them with you,” he wrote. He said many of the issues raised were “under consideration” and that he and the editors are “committed to fostering and developing a highly successful and welcoming workplace that provides the best possible opportunities for all of our journalists, regardless of gender, race or sexual orientation.”  After the email flurry, Baker met with a few women at the company, but in the June follow-up, the authors make it clear that not much has happened since. On pay, after a widely publicized report from the reporters’ union last year, Dow Jones did take action, hiring an outside consulting firm to analyze salaries. The result: The company says only 3 percent of salaries required adjustments and that those were made. In his email in March to the reporters, Baker writes about the salary review. “The adjustments for the impacted group, which included both men and women and spanned multiple ethnicities, have been completed,” he writes. In an follow-up exchange, the women ask Baker for more transparency on the salary analysis. “I’m eager to be as transparent as possible,” Baker states. “Though I am sure you’ll understand that when it comes to individual salaries, we have to handle sensitively.” To be clear, the writers weren’t looking to learn their colleagues’ salaries, but to get a better sense of how such an analysis was conducted. Comparing pay is a tricky thing, and even systemic discrepancies can be explained away by a consulting firm paid by an employer that may not be interested in, essentially, giving half its workforce a raise.  The company hasn’t shared the particulars of that research with staff or the union, says Tim Martell, the executive director of IAPE, the news guild that represents the Journal’s reporters. “They told us 31 employees received a salary adjustment, but haven’t given us methodology or data. We only have their word,” he says. The union report released this month, on the other hand, offers an extremely detailed look at pay, releasing average salary information for workers by age and location. The union has also offered to review the salaries of its members and give them a report on where they stand in the organization. Martell says he’s received hundreds of requests ― mostly from women ― and so far has produced about 88 reports that give reporters a sense of where their pay stands relative to the median salary of someone working in the same location with a similar job title and level of experience. Several Journal reporters told HuffPost they weren’t surprised about the pay gap at the paper. “I always heard about women getting paid significantly less than men, but I didn’t think about it on a personal level until it happened to me,” said a former Wall Street Journal staffer who left the paper in 2015. After four years at the Journal, this staffer learned that a man sitting next to her, with the same level of experience and job title, was making $30,000 more a year than she was. He’d been hired relatively recently. When she raised the issue with her boss, she was told that because her male colleague was an “external hire,”  they had to pay more to poach him. “They were trying to convince him to join,” she explained. The female staffer got a 2 percent raise. “That didn’t come close to closing the gap,” she said. “I was very angry.” Her colleague ended up getting promoted and landing a new title a few weeks after she complained. Read the emails in full below. Email sent Friday, June 9, on behalf of nearly 200 WSJ reporters: Dear Gerry and Matt, You closed the meeting with three of us in April by encouraging us to hold you accountable on issues of diversity in the WSJ newsroom. It’s now mid-June, and on behalf of the nearly 200 colleagues who signed our initial letter, we wanted to check in regarding that conversation and what steps The Journal leadership has taken to address the problems discussed. Specifically, you and Matt said at that meeting that you would undertake a review of bylines, including video and WSJ conferences, to evaluate whether women are underrepresented. Our original letter pointed out that just one Saturday Review cover essay was authored by a woman over the prior six months. Little has changed: nine of the past 11 were by men.   We are also eager for an update regarding the intention you expressed in April to gather additional data from HR on the pay gap analysis, particularly on the compensation concerns within the newsroom. As we expressed in the letter and our follow-up meeting, we aren’t satisfied by what the company has shared thus far in terms of how it calculates appropriate pay ranges, how wide those ranges are and how many in the newsroom specifically were flagged as having pay inequities. Without breaking out newsroom results from the overall company numbers, we are left concerned that pay inequities do still plague this division. Finally, we are curious about the masthead changes you said were imminent. Until our leadership reflects a more diverse population ― the population we are trying to attract as new subscribers ― we may not be producing the best journalism possible. That became apparent in this story from the Quants series recently, in which references to the overwhelmingly male pipeline from the athletic pitch to Wall Street were never explicitly acknowledged as such until a (female) reporter brought the omission to the attention of the Standards team. The fix required just two words, but meant a world of difference. Same for the leder on Target’s response to North Carolina’s bathroom law, which characterized trans individuals as sexual predators in a quote from the American Family Association but initially offered no rebuttal. At least seven reporters and editors met to discuss the incident with Neal Lipschutz, expressing concern about how The Journal covered trans people and members of other minority groups and encouraging―at the very least―the adoption of a policy in which we seek out comment from those groups being accused of such offenses. Outspoken individuals helped spur changes in those incidents, but as a newsroom going forward, we must still do better. We look forward to hearing more from you as this fiscal year closes out. Best, Response from Baker on June 13: Thank you for this. As we told you back in April, we do indeed take these issues seriously and I certainly am grateful to you for holding me accountable. If you don’t mind, I will take some time to respond in greater length seriatim to your various points, many of which have great validity.  For now, we are right in the final stages of nailing down the new newsroom leadership structure and I should be in position to make some announcements about this by early July.  You’ll get a chance then to observe how we address the leadership issues you raised, as well as some of your other concerns.  I will respond to you at greater length by then and I’d be delighted to then meet and talk further. Gerry Gerard Baker Editor in Chief The Wall Street Journal Earlier email from March 28 signed by 197 staffers: Dear Gerry and Matt, We are concerned about the role of women and people of color in The Wall Street Journal’s newsroom, and would like to discuss diversity initiatives with you. Our highest ranking female role model left the company earlier this year. There are currently four women and eight men listed as deputy managing editors, and both editorial page editors are men. Nearly all the people at high levels at the paper deciding what we cover and how are white men. More than a year after IAPE released data showing that union-represented women reporters here make 90 cents for every $1 their male counterparts earn, and that black and Hispanic women earn the least among all union-represented employees, we feel that the underlying issues regarding pay equity have not been adequately addressed. We were troubled most recently by a report issued last week by the Women’s Media Center showing that 34.3% of WSJ’s A-section bylines from September through November were from women, down from 39.2% the prior year. Women comprise 49% of our union-represented reporters, writers and senior writers, according to IAPE data. During the same period, 42.5% of bylines at the Washington Post came from women and the New York Times saw an increase in female bylines to 39% from 32.3% the prior year. We recognize that there are potential flaws with an external study that only counted bylines in a single section over a three-month period. But in the absence of other data from the company, this study suggests a problem with female representation among A-section bylines. There are troubling signs in other parts of the paper as well. For example, over the past six months, the high-profile Saturday Review cover piece was written by a woman just once. And following the most recent round of layoffs and buyouts, just 18% of our union-represented writers, editors, visual journalists and reporters are people of color. Diversity in the newsroom is good for business and good for our coverage. We would like to see the Journal undertake a more comprehensive, intentional and transparent approach to improving it. We know that this is a topic being discussed as part of the broader WSJ 2020 project, and we stand ready to work with you to ensure that we have a strong pipeline of women, racial and ethnic minorities, and those from a diverse set of socioeconomic backgrounds, ready for promotion when the opportunity next arises. This will also help ensure that prospective new hires feel they could flourish here. We are eager to see efforts similar to those launched at ProPublica be created in our own newsroom. Among those programs, we suggest: ―A Rooney rule ensuring that women and minorities are considered in the slate of candidates for all leadership positions. ―A significant effort made to hire a woman in a masthead-level position overseeing news gathering and involved in setting the coverage agenda, with consideration for women who are also racial and ethnic minorities. Many of the women in leadership positions have the word “deputy” in their title, including the deputy U.S. News and Money & Investing editors. ―Manager training to address and dispel assumptions about what individuals want their career paths to look like. For example, parents of young children may be eager to do a stint abroad or a breaking-news beat. And we have typically had few women on beats such as economics and sports, despite interest among women in covering those beats. ―Greater flexibility for parents that still offers them the opportunity to move up the newsroom ladder. ―A review of how well we do in quoting women as expert sources, rather than just men, especially in economics and markets stories, along with a concerted effort by managers and reporters to diversify our source pools. ―A detailed report of salaries among reporters, editors and other newsroom roles, broken down by section or group (US News, our global regions, M&I, Life & Arts, etc.), by gender and by race/ethnicity, shared with staff. We would welcome the opportunity to meet, brainstorm other ideas and agree to specific next steps to ensure that all journalists in this newsroom are treated fairly and paid equitably. Sincerely, And Baker’s response the same day in March:  Thank you for the note addressed to Matt Murray and me. First, let me assure you that Matt and I - and all the editorial leadership - take your concerns seriously. I look forward to having a full discussion about the issues you raise in a spirit of constructive cooperation. We are absolutely committed to fostering and developing a highly successful and welcoming workplace that provides the best possible opportunities for all of our journalists, regardless of gender, race or sexual orientation. As you note, the people stream of the WSJ 2020 process is reviewing these and other issues. Some of the proposals in your note are already under consideration in that work, led by Christine Glancey. She’ll be taking part in a Storylab session on Thursday, which I encourage you to attend to learn more about these efforts and share your ideas. While we realize that there are many elements that contribute to the creation and maintenance of a properly diverse workforce, I do want to take a moment to address the issue of pay equity you raise. In particular I wish to highlight the comprehensive internal and external reviews of our compensation practices that were done in response to the IAPE report mentioned in your letter. The internal review was led by our People team, and the external review was overseen by Willis Towers Watson. The final analysis of both exercises showed that fewer than 3% of Dow Jones employees needed pay adjustments. The adjustments for the impacted group, which included both men and women and spanned multiple ethnicities, have been completed. In order to track our continued progress, we are already midway through new internal and external reviews for 2017. Again, I appreciate the seriousness of all these issues and I look forward to discussing them with you. Sincerely, Gerry Clarification: A reference in this article to a page-one article about Target has been amended to reflect that the article was subject to an editorial process. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Выбор редакции
20 июня, 19:34

Fox’s £11.7bn bid for Sky ‘should be referred to competition authorities’

Labour’s deputy leader urges culture secretary to act after Ofcom delivers report on Rupert Murdoch’s proposed takeoverLabour’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, has called on the culture secretary to refer Rupert Murdoch’s proposed £11.7bn takeover of Sky to the competition authorities for further scrutiny.The media regulator, Ofcom, delivered the conclusions of its investigation into the deal to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport on Tuesday. Karen Bradley, the culture secretary, has said she will publish the report by 29 June. Continue reading...

27 ноября 2014, 09:05

ЕС vs США: Google предлагают разбить на куски

Европейский парламент готовится к обсуждению странного вопроса: "стоит ли разделить компанию Google на несколько отдельных сервисов?" У американских коллег сама идея вызывает все возможные негативные эмоции - от недоумения до негодования.  Показать "Кузькину мать" Европарламент не способен разрушить Google. В конце концов, штаб-квартира компании находится в США, и кроме американских властей структуру ее бизнеса никто не может изменить. Но в Европе продолжается антимонопольное расследование деятельности Google, в рамках которого политики и чиновники придумывают новые способы ограничения экспансии американцев на своей территории. На таком фоне действия Европарламента являются скорее намеком на продолжение преследования зарубежного интернет-гиганта. Законотворцы могут поддержать идею отделения поисковика Google от других фирменных сервисов. Если это произойдет, американцы должны получить четкий сигнал, отражающий позицию властей Евросоюза. До сих пор центральное место в расследовании занимали именно антимонопольщики из Еврокомиссии. В Америке на выпад со стороны европейцев уже отреагировали сразу два правительственных комитета. Их представители, сенаторы Рон Уайден и Оррин Хэтч заявили: "Это предложение и другие подобные ему идеи способствуют строительству стен, а не мостов. При этом не учитываются в полной мере те негативные эффекты, которые могут навредить торговым отношениям США и ЕС". В США считают, что Европа нарушает принцип открытых рынков. Говорится также о "политизации" процесса. Действующие лица Интересно, что против разделения Google выступает Гюнтер Эттингер. Да, тот самый Гюнтер Эттингер, который раньше отвечал за энергетику и присутствовал на переговорах между Украиной и Россией по газу. Теперь он еврокомиссар по вопросам цифровых технологий. Эттингер уверен, что бить Google на части никто не будет. Кто же тогда решил голосовать? Это Андреас Шваб, представитель консервативного крыла Европарламента и испанец Рамон Тремоза, представляющий интересы Каталонии. Эти политики утверждают, что усилия Еврокомиссии пока не оправдали себя, а поведение Google на рынке Старого Света напоминает монополизм. "До сих пор Google отказывалась придумать какие-либо идеи, способные изменить ситуацию и снять претензии со стороны Еврокомиссии. Вместо этого компания продолжала вести дела как ей заблагорассудится. Таким образом она давит на конкурентную среду, что вредит европейским потребителям и бизнесу", - считают Шваб и Тремоза.  Ссылки по теме Мердок: "Google – шайка пиратов" Европа забывает, Google хочет вспомнить все Google наконец договорилась с европейскими властями В самой Еврокомиссии произошли перестановки. Хоакин Альмуния отправился в отставку, и его место заняла Маргрете Вестегер. Интересно, какую позицию займет она и как далеко готова будет пойти ради обеспечения свободной конкуренции на интернет-рынке в том виде, в каком эту конкуренцию видят консерваторы из Европарламента. Битва за правду или зависть? В данный момент 90% поисковых запросов в Европе приходится на Google. В 2010г. конкуренты подали жалобу на американского игрока, объявив, что он мешает им развиваться. Речь идет в частности о рекламе и выгодном положении партнеров в поисковых результатах. Напомним, что ранее медиа-магнат Руперт Мердок сделал громкое заявление по поводу Google. С помощью исполнительного директора News Corp Роберта Томсона он попытался донести до антимонопольных органов мысль о том, что Google отдает предпочтение своим сайтам-партнерам. Если пользователь вбивает запрос в поисковик, то якобы получает именно те результаты, которые принесут Google максимальное количество денег. Подобные претензии озвучивались и раньше, но News Corp сформулировала их, пожалуй, максимально жестко. Отметим, что Google все-таки пытается найти мирное решение. Так в начале этого года компания согласилась выводить в результатах поиска рекламные объявления, предоставляемые конкурентами.

08 сентября 2014, 17:03

20 миллиардеров, которые управляют политикой США

Они добились успеха в бизнесе и инвестициях, и теперь пытаются протолкнуть свои и чужие политические идеи в политической системе США. В нашем списке самые влиятельные миллиардеры-политики Америки.  20.Элис Уолтон Элис Уолтон - наследница богатства крупнейшей в мире розничной сети Wal-Mart, пусть и не единственная. Уолтон вполне открыто поддерживает Хиллари Клинтон и вложилась в так называемый "PAC" (Комитет политических действий) под названием "Ready for Hillary".  19.Дональд Трамп Владелец конгломерата The Trump Organization и король американского сектора недвижимости Дональд Трамп, как и многие представители большого бизнеса, придерживается республиканских взглядов. Напомним, что Республиканская партия поддерживает наиболее мягкую налоговую политику в отношении богачей.  18.Марк Андрессен Инвестор-миллиардер Марк Андрессен уверен, что будущее за Республиканской партией США. Он поддерживал кандидата от республиканцев Митта Ромни на президентских выборах 2012г. В данный момент Андрессен инвестриует в широкий спектр активов, многие из которых будут влиять и на политический фон. Стоит вспомнить хотя бы о криптовалюте bitcoin.  17.Питер Дж. Питерсон Питерсон был министром торговли при Ричарде Никсоне, а теперь управляет мощным фондом. Миллиардер ратует за уменьшение государственного долга, и с помощью Peter G. Peterson Foundation основал такие организации, направленные на борьбу с долгами США как Fix the Debt и Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.  16.Поль Зингер Поль Зингер - бизнесмен с партийным билетом. Он консервативный республиканец, но выступает за однополые браки. Именно эта идея стала для него центральной в политической деятельности. С помощью организации American Unity он вложил $2 млн в поддержку республиканцев, которые также выступают за однополые браки. Главный актив Зингера - Elliott Management Corporation.  15.Арт Поуп Бывший председатель бюджетного комитета Северной Каролины и преуспевающий бизнесмен Арт Поуп вложил миллионы долларов в продвижение своих политических идей. В первую очередь, речь идет о свободном рынке, который Поуп считает основной составляющей успешной экономики. Арт Поуп также республиканец.  14.Пьер и Памела Омидьяр Семья иранского происхождения, которая добилась успеха в США, вкладывает существенные средства в продвижение идеи прозрачности и открытости. Пьер и Памела интересуются также вопросами прав на собственность и экономического развития.  13.Джефф и Макинзи Безос Кто бы мог подумать, что руководство Amazon.com может интересоваться политикой. Однако Джефф Безос недавно приобрел издание Washington Post и вложил $2,5 млн в поддержку однополых браков. Напомним, что этот вопрос в США остается одним из наиболее острых в области внутренней политики.  12.Марк Цукерберг И снова миллиардер из высокотехнологического сектора, который интересуется политикой. Марк Цукерберг совместно с организацией FWD.us работает над иммиграционной реформой, а в Нью-Джерси проталкивает реформу начального образования. Напомним, что самому владельцу Facebook в настоящий момент всего 30 лет.  11.Питер Тиль Питерь Тиль, известный инвестор, владелец хэдж-фондов и сооснователь PayPal, вложил $2,6 млн в предвыборную кампанию в 2012г., деньги получил Рон Пол, который вылетел из гонки во время праймериз. В последнее время Тиль активно выступает в пользу увеличения минимального размера оплаты труда.  10.Уоррен Баффет Миллиардер Баффет, владелец знаменитого Berkshire Hathaway, сыграл важную роль в политике США после избрания Барака Обамы на пост президента. Уоррен Баффет выступает за ограничение власти богачей, увеличение налогов для них, и собирается расстаться с большей частью своего богатства в рамках The Giving Pledge ("Клятва дарения").  9.Пенни Прицкер Пенни Прицкер была министром торговли и одним из главных лоббистов идей Барака Обамы. Кроме того, Прицкер является сооснователем PSP Capital Partners, Pritzker Realty Group и еще ряда крупных фирм, что придает ее голосу значимость, когда речь заходит о внутренней политике.  8.Джон и Лора Арнольд Джон Арнольд управлял крупным хэдж-фондом, и фокусировался на инвестициях в газовые активы а потом стал филантропом. Правда, не каждый найдет желание помочь людям в его стремлении добиться сокращения пенсий и добиться роста финансовой нагрузки для работников предприятий.  7.Билл и Мелинда Гейтс The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation - один из самых авторитетных благотворительных фондов, инвестирующих в борьбу с болезнями и бедностью в развивающихся странах, в частности, в Африканских. Также основатель Microsoft и его супруга сражаются за реформирование американской системы образования и легализацию однополых браков.  6.Руперт Мердок Руперт Мердок контролирует Wall Street Journal и Fox News - это важнейшие поставщики политических и экономических новостей. Таким образом, Мердок сосредоточил в своих руках активы, способные задавать новостной тон и влиять на настроения в обществе. Кроме того, Руперт Мердок сотрудничает с Bloomberg по вопросу иммиграционной реформы.  5.Джордж Сорос Джордж Сорос открыто лоббирует идеи демократов. Он потратил $1 млн в 2012г. на поддержку Барака Обамы на выборах. Кроме того, Сорос в данный момент является сопредседателем комитета политических действий "Ready for Hillary".  4.Шелдон Эделсон Наша жизнь - игра, и один из королей игорного бизнеса Шелдон Эделсон активно вкладывает средства в политику. Он потратил $93 млн, чтобы "победить Барака Обаму". Речь, конечно, не о том, что бизнесмен надеялся участвовать в выборах, а о поддержке республиканцев, которые "выполняют свои обещания". На следующих выборах Эделсон инвестирует в кампанию вдвое больше.  3.Том Стейер Стейер - сооснователь и один из руководителей фонда Farallon Capital Management. Он также основал несколько банков. Помимо бизнеса Тома Стейера интересуют вопросы охраны окружающей среды, и он активно лоббирует соответствующие идеи в политической среде.  2.Майкл Блумберг Бывший мэр Нью-Йорка и основатель агентства Bloomberg Майкл Блумберг активно борется с бесконтрольным распространением оружия. Он инвестировал $50 млн в противодействие организации NRA, которая как раз пытается добиться свободной торговли оружием на всей территории США, делая отсылку ко Второй поправке к Конституции.  1.Чарльз и Дэвид Кох Братья Кох инвестировали $30 млн в программу, которая выявляет слабые стороны демократов. Это специальная рекламная кампания, навредившая тем политикам, которым есть что скрывать. К следующим выборам общий объем инвестиций в эту программу семья Кох собирается довести до $290 млн. Еще одной жертвой стала программа здравоохранения "Obamacare".