Reply to: Leftie axe to grind?

[Old Greg]

It doesn't say that now - they've dropped the takeover bit from the 1st paragraph.


Let's see. If 3.6 million represents a 68% rise, then last year he made 2.14 million; i.e. just over a million in bonus.

Why couldn't they say "M&S Boss doubles bonus"? That sounds a lot more positive.

Maybe it would sound too positive? I thought it was meant to sound neutral. Back to the original point of Leftie Axe to Grind, I don't think there'll be many lefties sat around reading that thinking, 'Ha, that socked it to the capitalist scum-bag',

[Sysman]

And the 1st paragraph in bold says:

'Mr Rose is creditted [ ] with fending off a takeover attempt
Marks & Spencer chief executive Stuart Rose received £3.6m in salary and bonuses last year, up 68% on a year ago, the High Street chain has said.

It doesn't say that now - they've dropped the takeover bit from the 1st paragraph.

It defines the pay as 'salary' and 'bonuses'. If you guys think this article is left-wing axe-grinding, you've got a pretty low threshold.

Let's see. If 3.6 million represents a 68% rise, then last year he made 2.14 million; i.e. just over a million in bonus.

Why couldn't they say "M&S Boss doubles bonus"? That sounds a lot more positive.

[Old Greg]

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.

And the 1st paragraph in bold says:

'Mr Rose is creditted [ ] with fending off a takeover attempt
Marks & Spencer chief executive Stuart Rose received £3.6m in salary and bonuses last year, up 68% on a year ago, the High Street chain has said.

It defines the pay as 'salary' and 'bonuses'. If you guys think this article is left-wing axe-grinding, you've got a pretty low threshold.

[Sysman]

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.

[wendigo100]

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.

[andy]

You ever read a newspaper?

The Sun is a newspaper

[Kyajae]

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.

[Old Greg]

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.

[Rantor]

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?

[Kyajae]

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.

[Kyajae]

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!

[Old Greg]

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.

[King Cnvt]

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?

[threaded]

The problem is when he has a few bad years and gets the sack he'll get paid even more ! He does seem to know what he's doing but plenty of the multi millions boys aren't worth it.

Well, you'll first have to define 'bad' years! If 'bad' meaning the books look tulipe, but my core investors will now be able to increase their holdings, due to a depressed share price, and thereby get bigger divis next year...

HTH

[wendigo100]

What is news worthy about this article. It strikes me it is trying to say

"look at how much this person gets? How is that right?"

Probably written by a leftie student on work experience at the beeb.

I don't see that at all, it looks a fair article. 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.