• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Leftie axe to grind?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    Originally posted by wendigo100
    I don't see that at all. They give him credit for turning the company around.

    It is newsworthy because M&S are a big and long-established brand, and especially as they went downhill a few years ago.
    The headline and the main body just focusses on the guys pay.

    "The bumper remuneration package"

    "Under a long-term pay plan, he also stands to get the firm's maximum bonus of four times his salary - worth £4.2m."

    "M&S's annual report revealed that Mr Rose was in line for a further £8m in cash and shares if the firm continued to grow profits at 10% or more."

    Maybe it's just me. Why not focus the article on the M&S turnaround, with appropriate headline and then final para about this guys pay?

    Comment


      #12
      Originally posted by King Cnvt
      The headline and the main body just focusses on the guys pay.

      "The bumper remuneration package"

      "Under a long-term pay plan, he also stands to get the firm's maximum bonus of four times his salary - worth £4.2m."

      "M&S's annual report revealed that Mr Rose was in line for a further £8m in cash and shares if the firm continued to grow profits at 10% or more."

      Maybe it's just me. Why not focus the article on the M&S turnaround, with appropriate headline and then final para about this guys pay?
      You've been a bit selecetive in your quotes, mate - I'll try to rebalance:

      'The bumper remuneration package followed a resurgent 12 months for the firm, whose annual profits grew 28.5%.'

      'Mr Rose is widely credited for turning around the company's fortunes when he took over in 2004, saving M&S from a takeover by millionaire entrepreneur and Arcadia owner Sir Philip Green.

      M&S made £965.2m in the year to the end of March 2007, up from £751.4m the previous year.'

      There's been lots of news about M&S turnarond (in the BBC as well). I'm guessing that this follows an announcement from M&S on the guy's remuneration, which is newsworthy.

      Comment


        #13
        Originally posted by King Cnvt
        The headline and the main body just focusses on the guys pay.

        "The bumper remuneration package"

        "Under a long-term pay plan, he also stands to get the firm's maximum bonus of four times his salary - worth £4.2m."

        "M&S's annual report revealed that Mr Rose was in line for a further £8m in cash and shares if the firm continued to grow profits at 10% or more."

        Maybe it's just me. Why not focus the article on the M&S turnaround, with appropriate headline and then final para about this guys pay?

        I absolutely agree with you. The BBC cannot report anything note worthy without putting some kind of a left-wing slant on it. Impartiality? My Ar$e!

        Comment


          #14
          Originally posted by Old Greg
          The bumper remuneration package.....
          We can judge for oursleves if it's 'bumper' or not. We don't need journalists and reporters slipping in subtle subjectives into thier articles.

          Comment


            #15
            Originally posted by Kyajae
            We can judge for oursleves if it's 'bumper' or not. We don't need journalists and reporters slipping in subtle subjectives into thier articles.
            You ever read a newspaper?

            Comment


              #16
              Originally posted by Kyajae
              We can judge for oursleves if it's 'bumper' or not. We don't need journalists and reporters slipping in subtle subjectives into thier articles.
              Apply same to 'resurgent'. It looked like a neutral article to me.

              Comment


                #17
                Originally posted by Rantor
                You ever read a newspaper?
                Indded I do and I tend to judge the credence of the article by the presence or absence of these subtle subjectives. I know all papers try it, but I think it's not the right way to treat their readers.

                Comment


                  #18
                  Originally posted by Rantor
                  You ever read a newspaper?
                  The Sun is a newspaper

                  Comment


                    #19
                    Originally posted by Kyajae
                    We can judge for oursleves if it's 'bumper' or not. We don't need journalists and reporters slipping in subtle subjectives into thier articles.
                    adjectives

                    I'm a bit of a fan of Stuart Rose and what he has done. If I were to write about his remuneration, I might well use the word 'bumper' as well. I think you might be reading too much into this article, it is good.

                    Comment


                      #20
                      Originally posted by wendigo100
                      I don't see that at all, it looks a fair article. They give him credit for turning the company around.
                      It's the headline quoting 68%.

                      A 30K rise on a million quid comes to 3%.

                      They don't quote what last year's bonus was, so we don't know how accurate that 68% is.
                      Behold the warranty -- the bold print giveth and the fine print taketh away.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X