Posts Tagged ‘USA TODAY’
ABC NEWS, AIRLINES, BUSINESS, CBS NEWS, CNN, COMPUTER SECURITY, CREDIT CARDS, CYBERSECURITY, DAIRY QUEEN, FACEBOOK, JOHN HERING, JPMORGAN/CHASE, LILY TOMLIN, LOOKOUT, LUGGAGE THEFTS, MA BELL, NBC NEWS, ROWAN & MARTIN'S LAUGH-IN, STAPLES, TARGET, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, Business, Law, Politics, Social commentary on October 23, 2014 at 2:52 pm
Comedian Lily Tomlin rose to fame on Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In as Ernestine, the rude, sarcastic switchboard operator for Ma Bell.
She would tap into customers’ calls, interrupt them, make snide remarks about their personal lives. And her victims included celebrities as much as run-of-the-mill customers.

On one occasion, she called then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, letting him know that “it really takes a Hoover [vacuum cleaner] to dig up the dirt.”
She introduced herself as working for “the phone company, serving everyone from presidents and kings to the scum of the earth.”
But perhaps the line for which her character is best remembered was: “We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re the phone company.”
Watching Ernestine on Laugh-In was a blast for millions of TV viewers during the mid-1960s and early 70s. But confronting such corporate arrogance in real-life is no laughing matter.
Clearly, too many companies take the same attitude as Ernestine: “We don’t care. We don’t have to.”
This is especially true for companies that are supposed to safeguard their customers’ most sensitive information–such as their credit card numbers, addresses, emails and phone numbers.
An October 22 “commentary” published in Forbes magazine raises the highly disturbing question: “Cybersecurity: Does Corporate America Really Care?”
And the answer is apparently: No.
Its author is John Hering, co-founder and executive director of Lookout, which bills itself as “the world leader in mobile security for consumers and enterprises alike.”
Click here: Cybersecurity: Does corporate America really care?
October proved a bad month for credit card-using customers of Kmart, Staples and Dairy Queen–all of which have reported data breaches involving the theft of credit card numbers.
Earlier breaches had hit Target, Home Depot and JPMorgan/Chase.
“One thing is clear,” writes Hering. “CEOs need to put security on their strategic agendas alongside revenue growth and other issues given priority in boardrooms.”
Hering warns that “CEOs don’t seem to be making security a priority.” And he offers several reasons for this:
- The sheer number of data compromises;
- Relatively little consumer outcry;
- Almost no impact on the companies’ standing on Wall Street;
- Executives may consider such breaches part of the cost of doing business.
“There’s a short-term mindset and denial of convenience in board rooms,” writes Hering.
“Top executives don’t realize their systems are vulnerable and don’t understand the risks. Sales figures and new products are top of mind; shoring up IT systems aren’t.”
Anyone who’s ever watched the operation of an airport luggage carousel has seen this principle in action.
If you’ve checked your luggage, then you need to head for the baggage carousel as quickly as you can get out of the airplane.

Because if you don’t get there in time to grab your own bag, there’s a good chance that someone else will.
The reason? There’s no security officer there to make sure that your luggage goes only to you, and not to someone else.
Experienced baggage thieves know this. So they wait at the luggage carousel for a piece of luggage to go around two or three times. If no one collects it, they assume the owner isn’t there yet–and make off with it.
Sure, there might not be anything of value in it–from the thief’s viewpoint, anyway.
No diamonds.
No jewels.
No expensive cameras.
For the thief, it’s a setback–but only a minor one. He simply dumps the luggage and perhaps goes back to the carousel for another shot at finding a bag stuffed with valuables.
But for the traveler-victim, it’s a disaster.
Most–if not all–of his clothes are gone.
Anything personal–such as gifts he was bringing for friends or relatives–is gone.
So are any vitally-needed medications–if he was foolish enough to store these in his suitcase instead of a carry-on bag.
And does the airline care?
Don’t be stupid.
Why should they? They got your money when you bought the plane ticket.
That’s all they wanted from you. And the truth is, that’s all they’ve ever wanted from you–even during the “golden age of air travel” before airplanes became “flying buses.”
The skies of United were never so friendly that airlines felt an obligation to ensure that their passengers’ luggage was actually waiting for its rightful owners.
And the same principle–or lack of principle–applies with such companies as banks, department stores and insurance companies that hold the most private information of their customers.
There are two ways corporations can be forced to start behaving responsibly on this issue.
First, some smart attorneys need to start filing class-action lawsuits against companies that don’t take steps to safeguard their customers’ private information.
Second, there must be Federal legislation to ensure that multi-million-dollar fines are levied against such companies–and especially their CEOs–when such data breaches occur.
Only then will the CEO mindset of “We don’t care, we don’t have to” be replaced with: “We care, because our heads will roll if we don’t.”
ABC NEWS, CBS NEWS, CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, CNN, FACEBOOK, INTERROGATION, MIRANDA VS. ARIZONA, NBC NEWS, POLICE, THE DENVER POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Social commentary on October 22, 2014 at 12:01 am
Ever heard of “polygraph by copier”?
If you haven’t, here’s how it works:
A detective loads three sheets of paper into a Xerox machine.
“Truth” has been typed onto the first sheet.
“Truth” has been typed onto the seond sheet.
“Lie” has been typed onto the third sheet.
Then a criminal suspect is led into the room and told to put his hand against the side of the machine.

“What is your name?” asks the detective.
The suspect gives it.
The detective hits the copy button, and a page comes out: “Truth.”
“Where do you live?” asks the detective.
The suspect gives an address, the detective again hits the copy button, and a second page appears: “Truth.”
Then comes the bonus question: “Did you or did you not kill Big Jim Tate on the evening of….?”
The suspect answers. The detective presses the copy button one last time, and the sheet appears: “Lie.”
“Well, well, well, you lying little bastard,” says the detective.
Convinced that the police have found some mysterious way to peer into the darkest recesses of his criminality, the suspect “gives it up” and makes a full confession.
Yes, contrary to what many believe, police can legally use deceit to obtain a confession.
In 1973, the Supreme Court ruled, in United States v. Russell: “Nor will the mere fact of deceit defeat a prosecution, for there are circumstances when the use of deceit is the only practicable law enforcement technique available.”
In that case, the Court narrowly upheld a conviction for methamphetamine production even though the defendant had argued entrapment.
So what types of interrogative deceit might a police officer use to develop admissible evidence of a suspect’s guilt?
The general rule is that deception can be used so long as it’s not likely to cause an innocent person to commit a crime or confess to a crime that s/he didn’t commit.
Click here: The Lawful Use of Deception – Article – POLICE Magazine

Consider the following examples:
- A detective is interviewing a suspect in a rape case. “Oh, that girl,” he says, thus implying that the victim was a slut and had it coming. The suspect, thinking he’s dealing with a sympathetic listener, starts bragging about his latest conquest–only to learn, too late, that his listener isn’t so simpatico after all.
- “We found your prints on the gun”–or on any number of other surfaces. Actually, there are few good places on a pistol to leave prints. And those that are left can be smeared. The same goes for other surfaces. But if a suspect can be led to believe the cops have his prints, a confession is often forthcoming.
- A police officer is interrogating a suspect in a murder case. “He came at you, didn’t he?” asks the cop. The suspect, who murdered the victim in cold blood, thinks he has an escape route. “Yeah, he came at me”–this confirming that, yes, he did kill the deceased.
- “Your partner just gave you up” is a favorite police strategen when there is more than one suspect involved. If one suspect can be made to “flip”–turn–against the other, the case is essentially wrapped up.
- Interrogating a bank robbery suspect, a cop might say: “We know you didn’t do the shooting, that you were only the wheelman.” This implies that the penalty for driving the getaway car is far less than that for killing someone during a robbery. In fact, criminal law allows every member of the conspiracy to be charged as a principal.
- “I don’t give a damn what you did,” says the detective. “Just tell me why you did it.” For some suspects, this offers a cathartic release, a chance to justify their guilt.
- The “good cop/bad cop” routine is known to everyone who has ever seen a police drama. Yet it continues to yield results so often it continues to be routinely used. “Look, I believe you,” says the “good” cop, “but my partner’s a real asshole. Just tell me what happened so we can clear this up and you can go.”
- “So,” says the detective, “why do you think the police believe you did it?” “I have no idea,” says the suspect, confident that he isn’t giving up anything that might come back to haunt him. “Well,” says the cop, “I guess you’ll just have to make something up.” Make something up sounds easy, but is actually a trap. The suspect may end up giving away details that could incriminate him–or lying so brazenly that his lies can be used against him.
So is there a best way for a suspect to deal with an invitation to waive his Miranda right to remain silent?
Yes, there is. It’s to refuse to say anything and to ask for permission to call a lawyer.
That’s the preferred method for Mafia hitmen–and accused police officers.
Any cop who finds himself under investigation by his department’s Internal Affairs unit automatically shuts up–and calls his lawyer.
Any other response–no matter how well-intentioned–may well result in a lengthy prison sentence.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CONGRESS, CORPORATIONS, CORRUPTION, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HUFFINGTON POST, MEDIA MATTERS, MICROSOFT, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, ONE-PERCENTERS, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, PUBLIC CAMPAIGN, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SATYA NADELLA, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, TAXES, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UNEMPLOYMENT, UPI, USA TODAY, WONKETTE
In Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on October 10, 2014 at 12:25 am
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella says women don’t need to ask for a raise. They should just trust “the system.”
Speaking on October 9 at an event in Phoenix to celebrate women in computing, Nadella was asked: What advice do you have for women who feel uncomfortable asking for a raise?
His reply: “It’s not really about asking for the raise, but knowing and having faith that the system will actually give you the right raises as you go along.
“Because that’s good karma. It’ll come back because somebody’s going to know that’s the kind of person that I want to trust.”

Satya Nadella
This from a CEO at whose company women comprise only 29% of its more than 100,000 employees. And where its CEO has a net worth of $45 million.
Click here: Satya Nadella – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If it’s true that corporations are people, then they are exceptionally greedy and selfish people.
A December, 2011 report by Public Campaign, highlighting corporate abuses of the tax laws, makes this all too clear.
Click here: For Hire: Lobbyists or the 99%?
Public Campaign is a national nonpartisan organization dedicated to reforming campaign finance laws and holding elected officials accountable.

Summarizing its conclusions, the report’s author writes:
“Amidst a growing federal deficit and widespread economic insecurity for most Americans, some of the largest corporations in the country have avoided paying their fair share in taxes while spending millions to lobby Congress and influence elections.”
Its key findings:
- The 30 big corporations analyzed in this report paid more to lobby Congress than they paid in federal income taxes between 2008 and 2010, despite being profitable.
- Despite making combined profits totaling $164 billion in that three-year period, the 30 companies combined received tax rebates totaling nearly $11 billion.
- Altogether, these companies spent nearly half a billion dollars ($476 million) over three years to lobby Congress. That’s about $400,000 each day, including weekends.
- In the three-year period beginning in 2009 through most of 2011, these large firms spent over $22 million altogether on federal campaigns.
- These corporations have also spent lavishly on compensatng their top executives ($706 million altogether in 2010).
Among those corporations whose tax-dodging and influence-buying were analyzed:
- General Electric
- Verizon
- PG&E
- Wells Fargo
- Duke Energy
- Boeing
- Consolidated Edison
- DuPont
- Honeywell International
- Mattel
- Corning
- FedEx
- Tenet Healthcare
- Wisconsin Energy
- Con-way
The report bluntly cites the growing disparity between the relatively few rich and the vast majority of poor and middle-class citizens:
“Over the past few months, a growing protest movement has shifted the debate about economic inequality in this country.
“The American people wonder why members of Congress suggest cuts to Medicare and Social Security but won’t require millionaires to pay their fair share in taxes.
“They want to know why they are struggling to find jobs and put food on the the table while the country’s largest corporations get tax breaks and sweetheart deals, then use that extra cash to pay bloated bonuses to CEOs or ship jobs overseas.
“….At a time when millions of Americans are still unemployed and millions more make tough choices to get by, these companies are enriching their top executives and spending millions of dollars on Washington lobbyists to stave off higher taxes or regulations.”
Assessing the results of corporate tax-dodging, the report states:
- Using various tax dodging techniques, including stashing profits in overseas tax havens and tax loopholes, 29 out of 30 companies featured in this study succeeded in paying no federal income taxes from 2008 through 2010.
- These 29 companies received tax rebates over those three years, ranging from $4 million for Corning to nearly $5 billion for General Electric and totally nearly $11 billion altogether.
- The only corporation that paid taxes in that three-year period, FedEx, paid a three-year tax rate of 1%, far less than the statutory rate of 35%.
The report bluntly notes the hypocrisy of corporate executives who call themselves “job creators” while enriching themselves by laying off thousands of employees:
“Another area where these corporations have decided to spend lavishly is compensation for their top executives ($706 million altogether in 2010).
“Executives doing particularly well work for General Electric ($76 million in total compensation in 2010), Honeywell International ($54 million), and Wells Fargo ($50 million).
“Executives who have seen the greatest increase work for DuPont (188% increase), Wells Fargo (180% increase) and Verizon (167% increase).
Despite being profitable, some of these corporations have actually laid off workers.
Since 2008, seven of the corporations have reported laying off American workers. The worst offenders–by 2011–are Verizon, which laid off at least 21,308 workers, and Boeing, which fired at least 14,862 employees.
Insisting that “corporations are people” wins applause from the wealthiest 1% and their Right-wing shills. But it does nothing to better the lives of the increasingly squeezed poor and middle-class.
If the nation is to avoid economic and moral bankruptcy, Americans must demand that powerful corporations be held accountable–and punished harshly when they behave irresponsibly.
ABC NEWS, ANTHEM BLUE CROSS, CALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER, CBS NEWS, CNN, EMERGENCY ROOMS, FACEBOOK, INSURANCE, MEDI-CAL INSURANCE PROGRAM, NBC NEWS, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE SHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, Business, Medical, Social commentary on August 12, 2014 at 9:02 pm
A friend of mine–I’ll call him Sam–recently broke his big toe. But Sam has a bigger problem than his big toe. He’s on Medi-Cal, the California medical plan for the poor.
And if you think the nation’s veterans have it bad, try getting medical care when doctors refuse to honor your insurance.
After breaking his toe while tripping over a bag, Sam went to his regular doctor, a general internist at California Pacific Medical Center (CPMC) in San Francisco.
The doctor examined Sam’s toe and said he was worried. It was a big fracture, and if the bones didn’t knit together properly, Sam could be in for big trouble.
So he advised Sam to see an orthopedic surgeon. Luckily for Sam, said his doctor, there was one close by in the same office. The doctor would ask him to check out Sam’s injury then and there.
Unluckily for Sam, he was on Medi-Cal--and the orthopedic surgeon refused to honor his insurance and see him.
Sam’s doctor sent him home, saying, “I’ll try to find someone as soon as I can.”

At home, Sam called Anthem Blue Cross, the private insurance company now providing coverage to the poor under the state Medi-Cal program.
The Anthem representative soon emailed Sam a list of Anthem Blue Cross orthopedic surgeons who would supposedly accept his insurance. He then printed out the list on his computer.
Sam then made another phone call–to the office of Dr. Vernon L. Giang, Chief Medical Executive for CPMC. There he spoke with an assistant to Dr. Giang.
He explained his difficulties in getting medical care at CPMC. He added that he had obtained a 14-page list of Anthem-Blue Cross-approved orthopedic surgeons who should be willing to accept his insurance.
The assistant said she would gladly check out the list for any doctors affiliated with CPMC. But there was a problem. Sam needed to fax her the information–and Sam didn’t have a fax machine. Nevertheless,
Sam hobbled several blocks to a nearby Kinko’s/FedEx office, which had fax machines.
The next morning, Sam called Dr. Giang’s office. He reached the same assistant, who told him that the faxed material had come in. The bad news: There wasn’t a single doctor on that list whom she had called who would accept Sam’s insurance.
In addition, some of the doctors were “out of our plan.” Which meant that even if they had been willing to accept Sam’s insurance, he couldn’t have seen them.
The assistant was polite and sympathetic, but candid: CPMC’s doctors aren’t required to treat any patient whose insurance they dislike. In fact, CPMC cannot demand that they do so, since the doctors who are practice under its name are considered “independent practitioners.”
So Sam aimed higher. He phoned the office of Dr. Warren S. Browner, the CEO of California Pacific Medical Center.
But he didn’t reach Browner–or even a secretary.
As a rule, when you call a giant corporation and ask to speak with its CEO, this doesn’t happen. But what usually does happen is that you’re put through to the executive offices. You won’t speak with the CEO, but you’ll usually reach a secretary for him.
And if your message is one that poses legal or public relations disaster for the company, the odds are excellent that you’ll soon get a call back. Not from the CEO (except in rare cases) but from someone deputized to speak in his name–and to probably address your problem.
But, in this case, there was no secretary to answer the phone for Dr. Browner. Just a message machine.
So Sam left an urgent message, outlining his difficulties in getting medical care from CPMC.
No one from Dr. Browner’s office called him back that day.

Meanwhile, the pain in Sam’s foot was getting worse. So, later that day, he hobbled into an emergency room of CMPC.
A doctor examined Sam’s foot and ordered several X-rays taken of the broken toe. After examining these, he told Sam what he already knew: The toe was broken. He also warned that if it wasn’t treated properly, Sam could have great pain–such as from arthritis–in the future.
Sam explained how he had been unable to get an orthopedic surgeon to look at his toe. The doctor said he would try to find one who would.
Sam waited in the ER for almost four hours. When he finally saw the doctor again, the latter seemed embarrassed to give him the bad news. He hadn’t been any more successful than Sam at finding a CPMC orthopedic surgeon willing to treat Sam’s injury.
When Sam asked what he should do, the ER doctor said that “time” would take care of the injury.
The website for CPMC boasts: “At California Pacific Medical Center, our mission is to always give each patient the personal, hands-on attention they deserve.” Unless, of course, all of its doctors in a particular specialty refuse to honor the patient’s medical insurance.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, COLLEGE EDUCATION, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, EMPLOYMENT, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HUFFINGTON POST, JOB INTERVIEWS, JOB RECRUITERS, MARY POPPINS, MEDIA MATTERS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NANNYS, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, PLUTOCRACY, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, RESUMES, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TUITION COSTS, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Business, History, Law, Social commentary on July 10, 2014 at 11:41 am
Once again, June has come and gone–and, with it, an annual rite of passage for tens of thousands of college students: Graduation.
That occasion when young innocents formally leave the academic nest to make their way into the harsh realities of the work

Among those harsh realities: The average college graduate faces a debt loan of more than $29,400.
Click here: Average student loan debt: $29,400 – Dec. 4, 2013
But wait! There’s something even more demoralizing awaiting these “heirs of tomorrow.”
The discovery that, for all the “we hire only the brightest” rhetoric by employers, having a college degree actually means little to most CEOs.
A new report from the Center for College Affordability and Productivity concludes that nearly half of the nation’s recent college graduates hold jobs that don’t require a degree.
In short, many of the jobs they hold aren’t worth the price of that diploma.
From that report:
Increasing numbers of recent college graduates are ending up in relatively low-skilled jobs that, historically, have gone to those with lower levels of educational attainment. This study examines this phenomenon in some detail, concluding:
- About 48 percent of employed U.S. college graduates are in jobs that the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) suggests requires less than a four-year college education. Eleven percent of employed college graduates are in occupations requiring more than a high-school diploma but less than a bachelor’s, and 37 percent are in occupations requiring no more than a high-school diploma;
- The proportion of overeducated workers in occupations appears to have grown substantially; in 1970, fewer than one percent of taxi drivers and two percent of firefighters had college degrees, while now more than 15 percent do in both jobs;
- About five million college graduates are in jobs the BLS says require less than a high-school education;
Click here: Underemployment of College Graduates
But the future isn’t completely bleak–at least not for women willing to transform themselves into glorified babysitters for obscenely-rich families.
Consider a recent post on Facebook by AC Connections, which describes itself as “a nanny and household placement agency.”
Under the headline, “Growing Nanny Industry Is Enticing More College Graduates,” the ad/article begins:
“As more college graduates leave school and struggle to find work, they’re turning to the nanny industry.
“Many working moms love the idea of a highly-educated, experienced nanny providing individualized care for their children in their own homes. But it can come with a substantial price tag.
“In this challenging economic climate, more college graduates are finding a little spoonful of sugar in the burgeoning nanny industry.
“These ‘modern day Mary Poppinses’ are educated, experienced, and in increasingly high demand.”
The International Nanny Association claims that the average salary is about $16 an hour.
The ad asserts that “highly qualified and educated nannies in certain locations can make $100,000 or more each year. It’s not uncommon for nannies to start out with salaries comparable to entry-level finance careers.”
Click here: Growing Nanny Industry Is Enticing More College Graduates
Besides the money, says the ad, there are other reasons for becoming a nanny:
“Many love working with children, want a chance to use their college education, or enjoy the role of caretaker.”
“A chance to use their college education”? As in cleaning up spills, changing diapers and feeding baby food to infants?

So if you’re a college graduate who can’t convince an employer within your chosen profession–such as pharmacy or engineering–to hire you, there’s always the Mary Poppins option.
Or some similar menial “career” that caters to the indulgences of the American plutocracy, for whom $16 an hour amounts to a Snicker’s candy bar for the fast-disappearing middle class.
It should be enough to make you hesitate before signing up for a loan to cover the average $57,000 cost of a public college education.
Or an even larger loan to cover the $132,000 cost of a private college education.
But if you’re still thinking that “employers really respect that degree,” consider this: Job recruiters spend exactly six seconds examining your resume.
According to The Ladders research, recruiters spend an average of “six seconds before they make the initial ‘fit or not fit’ decision” to interview you.
Not hire you–just meet you. You’ll still have plenty of chances to get shot down during or after the interview.
Click here: What Recruiters Look At During The 6 Seconds They Spend On Your Resume
According to the study, when scanning a resume, recruiters looked at the following items:
-
Your name
- Current title and company
- Current position start and end dates
- Previous title and company
- Previous position start and end dates
- Education
American employers should be legally compelled to hire as responsibly as college students are expected to pursue an education.
Until this happens, those young men and women thinking of committing a big chunk of their time and going into massive debt to pursue a college degree should think twice before doing so.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMELIA EARHART, AP, BILL O'REILLY, BORIS YELTSIN, BRAD MELTZER, BRAD MELTZER DECODED, BREAKING NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DON LEMON, EMAIL, FACEBOOK, FOX NEWS, KGB, MALAYSIAN PLANE, MIKHAIL GORBACHEV, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, ROMAN EMPIRE, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOVIET UNION, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Politics, Social commentary on March 20, 2014 at 12:35 am
On March 8, 2014, Malaysian Airlines Flight 370 took off from Kuala Lumpur International Airport for Beijing Capital International Airport.
Less than an hour after taking off, the boeing 777-200ER last made contact with an air traffic control tower–and then vanished.
With it vanished 227 passengers–the majority of them Chinese–and a crew of 12.
By March 18, 26 nations were participating in the search.
Not since the 1937 disappearance of aviatrix Amelia Earhart has the disappearance of a single plane triggered such an international frenzy.
And that frenzy extends to the media coverage given it–especially on CNN.
Since its disappearance on March 8, Flight 370 has been the preeminent story on CNN.
With no telltale wreckage or even an oil slick to indicate the plane’s fate, CNN has been forced to make do with maps and “talking heads” speculation.
And to keep audiences attuned while there is no actual news to report, CNN has been forced to rely on a steady stream of “BREAKING NEWS” headlines.
And then what follows is more “talking heads” offering more speculation.
On March 16, CNN anchor Don Lemon and Brad Meltzer, host of Brad Meltzer Decoded, raised the possibility of “the supernatural” as responsible for the disappearance.
Lemon used a toy plane to demonstrate a series of turns and dives before simulating a landing on his anchor desk.

Don Lemon with his toy plane
“We go to church, the supernatural power of God,” said Lemon. “People are saying to me, ‘Why aren’t you talking about the possibility?’
“And I’m just putting it out there–that something odd happened to this plane, something beyond our understanding.”
And Meltzer responded: “People roll their eyes at conspiracy theories, but what conspiracy theories do is they ask the hardest, most outrageous questions sometimes, but every once in a while they’re right.
“You can say, ‘Oh, it crashed into the ocean. But where are the parts? Where are the pieces? Why did it keep going for seven hours?”
This, in turn, has had both a positive and a negative effect.
On the positive side: CNN–which has found itself struggling in the ratings war against Fox News and MSNBC–has seen its ratings surge.
Over the weekend of March 15-16, CNN’s ratings soared, rising by almost 100% in prime time.
On the negative side: CNN’s “All-Vanished-Plane/All-the-Time” coverage has annoyed and angered many other viewers–including some prominent ones.
One of these is Bill O’Reilly, host of Fox News program The OReilly Factor.
“When I’m watching this, I’m like throwing–I’m upset about it,” he said on March 18. “I know it’s ratings obviously or people wanna watch the mystery, but it’s now corrupting the news business I think.”
Charles Krauthammer, the conservative columnist, replied: What bothered him was that networks were treating the tragedy as “a game, when actually it was a terrible, terrible event.”
“There comes a point where it becomes a burlesque show, it becomes a farce and we’ve reached that point on this coverage,” O’Reilly said.
“When does Godzilla come in? And on another network they actually said aliens might’ve taken it. They actually said that on the air!”
As a result, there are three journalistic truths that CNN can–and should–take to heart:
- Breaking News!” means “news that is happening right now.” It does not mean “news that happened last week but we just found out about it today.” Nor does it mean speculation about events that still remain a mystery.
- It is possible to broadcast more than one news story in a 24-hour period. The disappearance of the Malaysian plane does raise troubling questions about aviation safety. But there are other events going on in the world. And some of them are–surprise!–even more important.
- When you don’t have any actual news to report on a particular story, just say so and move on to another story where you do have news. Putting a half-dozen “talking heads” around a table to endlessly speculate about what might have happened isn’t the same as actually reporting the news.
There’s nothing wrong with a network’s sticking with a story as long as (1) it’s truly important, and (2) it’s actually ongoing.
The classic example of this: When, in August, 1991, the KGB and other Right-wingers overthrew Mikhail Gorbachev, General Secretary of the Soviet Union.
Closely following this story–for reporters and viewers–made sense: The Soviet Union commanded enough nuclear weaponry to destroy the United States.

Boris Yeltsin, President of the Russian Federation, denounces the KGB coup
So it truly mattered whether Gorbachev–a moderate reformer–remained in power or was replaced by a KGB-sponsored coup.
Fortunately–for Gorbachev and the West–he was returned to power and Communism collapsed.
Watching on TV as Russians throw off the yoke of 70 years of Red slavery was like watching the fall of the Roman Empire.
This was a truly monumental and historical event. And those who lived through it as spectators could be grateful to CNN and other networks for their ongoing coverage.
But the disappearance of a single Malaysian plane doesn’t fit into these categories. Even if it proves monumentally good for CNN’s ratings.
2008 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANN COULTER, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, COMMUNISM, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE W. BUSH, GLENN BECK, HARRY S. TRUMAN, IRVING WALLACE, JOHN MCCAIN, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RICHARD NIXON, RUSH LIMBAUGH, SALON, Sarah Palin, SEAN HANNITY, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SPIRO AGNEW, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TREASON, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on October 25, 2013 at 12:00 am
On March 9, 1954, Edward R. Murrow, the most respected broadcast journalist in America, assailed the “smear-and-fear” tactics of Wisconsin Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy.
The forum was Murrow’s highly-rated documentary series, “See It Now.” The truth of Murrow’s remarks has outlasted the briefness of that 30-minute program.
They could have been applied to the “lie and deny” methods of the Presidency of Richard M. Nixon.
And to the Red-baiting attacks made by Republicans against President Bill Clinton.
And to the ongoing character assaults made by right-wingers against President Barack Obama.
“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty,” warned Murrow in that broadcast. “We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.

Edward R. Murrow
“We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men—not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular….
“We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. There is no way for a citizen of a republic to abdicate his responsibilities….
“We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom, wherever it continues to exist in the world. But we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home….
“Cassius was right. ‘The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.’”
After Obama announced the death of Osama Bin Laden, most of the Republican slander-peddlers momentarily fell silent.
Still, the legacy of hate and fear-mongering goes on.
There is a good reason for this: Republicans have found, repeatedly, that attacking the patriotism of their opponents is an effective vote-getter:
- It hurtled Dwight Eisenhower into the White House and Republicans into Congress in 1952 and 1956.
- It elected Richard Nixon President in 1968 and 1972.
- It gave control of the White House to Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984.
- It gave it to George H.W. Bush in 1988.
- And even though Bill Clinton won the Presidency in 1992, it gave Republicans control of the Congress in 1994.
- It gave the White House to George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004.
- It gave control of the House to Republicans in 2010, thus undermining the financial and healthcare reforms planned by Obama.
And since the 2008 election of Barack Obama as President, Republicans have coupled their traditional “Treason!” slander with both subtle and outright appeals to racism.
Most Republicans refuse to acknowledge this, but author Will Bunch has not been so reticent. In his 2010 book, The Backlash, he writes:
“…The year that had [conservatives] so terrified was 2050. In that year, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the U.S. population would grow to some 399 million people–but only 49.8% would be white….”

This was given added weight by the 2008 election of Barack Obama:
“The Democratic upstart–and his legion of supporters among the nonwhite as well as the young–was a 9/11-sized jolt to the white masses already so worried about the cultural implications of immigration.
“The year 2050 suddenly wasn’t two generations away but right here knocking on the front door, with a dark face and that scary name: Barack Hussein Obama.
“Like a fire spreading across dry sagebrush, it took no effort for fear of The Other to leap from the Mexicans in front of the Wal-Mart to the man now inside the Oval Office.”
An author who predicted this very scenario was the best-selling novelist, Irving Wallace.
His 1964 novel, The Man, positing the ascent of the first black President, appeared 44 years before Obama’s election.
The plot: The President and Speaker of the House are killed in an overseas building collapse, and the Vice-President declines the office due to age and ill-health. As a result, Senate President pro tempore Douglas Dilman suddenly becomes the first black man to occupy the Oval Office.
His Presidency is marked by white racists, black political activists, and an attempted assassination. Later, he is impeached on false charges for firing the racist Secretary of State.

A moderate by nature, Dilman tries to rule as a color-blind President. But he is repeatedly confronted with the brutal truth about himself–and his critics: He is black, and they cannot forgive him for it.
Southern Senator Watson, upon learning that Dilman has succeeded to the Presidency, says: “The White House isn’t going to be white enough from now on.”
And Kay Eaton, who lusts for her husband, the Secretary of State, to become President, blames him for not pushing hard enough for it: “You’re just a kingmaker to a jigaboo.”
2008 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANN COULTER, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, COMMUNISM, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE W. BUSH, GLENN BECK, HARRY S. TRUMAN, JOHN MCCAIN, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RICHARD NIXON, RUSH LIMBAUGH, SALON, Sarah Palin, SEAN HANNITY, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SPIRO AGNEW, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TREASON, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on October 24, 2013 at 1:50 am
On May 7, 2012, GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney attended a town-hall meeting in Euclid, Ohio.
“We have a president right now who is operating outside the construction of our Constitution,” a female attendee told Romney.
As the audience applauded, she continued: “And I do agree he should be tried for treason.
“But I wanna know what you are going to be able to do to help restore balance between the three branches of government and what you’re going to be able to do to restore our Constitution in this country?”
Unlike John McCain, who in 2008 memorably corrected a woman who declared Obama was “an Arab,” Romney didn’t issue such a correction. Instead, he chose to simply address the question.
Since the end of World War 11, Republicans have regularly hurled the charge of “treason” against anyone who dared to run against them for office or think other than Republican-sponsored thoughts.
Republicans had been locked out of the White House from 1933 to 1952, during the administrations of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman.
Determined to regain the Presidency by any means, they found that attacking the integrity of their fellow Americans a highly effective tactic.
During the 1950s, Wisconsin Senator Joseph R. McCarthy rode a wave of paranoia to national prominence. On February 9, 1950, he claimed:
“The State Department is infested with communists. I have here in my hand a list of 205—a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department.”

Joseph McCarthy
After four years of such frenzied attacks on Congress, the State Department and respected journalists such as Edward R. Murrow, McCarthy finally overstepped himself. He accused the United States Army of being an active hotbed for Communists.
At the Army-McCarthy hearings, McCarthy’s credibility was forever destroyed. He was finally censured by his fellow Senators and disappeared into anonymity, alcoholism and death in 1957.
The fact that McCarthy never uncovered one actual case of treason was conveniently overlooked during his lifetime.
And today, right-wing columnists like Ann Coulter try to rehabilitate his memory–just as right-wingers in Russia still try to rehabilitate the memory of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin.
Nevertheless, the success of McCarthy’s treason-charged rhetoric proved too alluring for other Republicans to resist. Among those who have greatly profited from hurling similar charges are:
- President Richard Nixon
- His vice president, Spiro Agnew
- Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich
- Former Congressman Dick Armey
- President George W. Bush
- Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin
- Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann
- Rush Limbaugh
- Glenn Beck
- Sean Hannity
- Bill O’Reilly.
The election of Barack Obama pushed the “treason chorus” to new heights of infamy. With no political scandal (such as Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky) to fasten on, the bureaucracy of the Republican Party deliberately promoted the slander that Obama was not an American citizen.
From this there could be only one conclusion: That he was an illegitimate President, and should be removed from office.
During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Republicans charged that Obama was really a Muslim non-citizen who intended to sell out America’s security to his Muslim “masters.”
And this smear campaign continued throughout his Presidency.
To the dismay of his enemies, Obama–in the course of a single week–dramatically proved the falsity of both charges.
On April 27, 2011, he released the long-form of his Hawaii birth certificate.

The long-form version of President Obama’s birth certificate
“We do not have time for this kind of silliness,” said Obama at a press conference, speaking as a father might to a roomful of spiteful children. “We have better stuff to do. I have got better stuff to do. We have got big problems to solve.
“We are not going to be able to do it if we are distracted, we are not going to be able to do it if we spend time vilifying each other…if we just make stuff up and pretend that facts are not facts, we are not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by side shows and carnival barkers.”
And on May 1, he announced the solving of one of those “big problems”: Osama bin Laden, mastermind of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, had been tracked down and shot dead by elite U.S. Navy SEALS in Pakistan.
Of course, Obama was only the latest Democratic President to be attacked as “unpatriotic.”
For more than a half-century, Republicans have accused their Democratic opponents of treason to gain and retain political power in America.
60 MINUTES, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, ATLAS SHRUGGED, AYN RAND, AYN RAND NATION, BUZZFEED, CAPITALISM, CBS NEWS, CNN, COMMUNISM, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, ECONOMICS, FACEBOOK, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, GARY WEISS, MEDICARE, MENINGITIS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEW ENGLAND COMPOUNDING CENTER, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OBJECTIVISM, OBJECTIVISTS, PHARMACEUTICALS, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOCIAL SECURITY, TEA PARTY, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WALL STREET
In Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on March 13, 2013 at 12:00 am
“Thirty years after her death, Ayn Rand’s ideas have never been more important.
“Unfettered capitalism, unregulated business, bare-bones government providing no social services, glorification of selfishness, disdain for Judeo-Christian morality—these are the tenets of Rand’s harsh philosophy.”
So reads the jacket blurb for Ayn Rand Nation: The Struggle for America’s Soul, by Gary Weiss.

“The timing of this book couldn’t be better for Americans who are trying to understand where in the hell the far-out right’s anti-worker, anti-egalitarian extremism is coming from,” asserts Jim Hightower, New York Times bestselling author of Thieves in High Places.
“Ayn Rand Nation introduces us to the godmother of such Tea Party craziness as destroying Social Security and eliminating Wall Street regulation. Weiss writes with perception and wit.”
For those who believe that Rand’s philosophy is the remedy for America’s economic and social ills, a 60 Minutes news story sounds a warning.
New England Compounding Center (NECC) pharmacy, based in Framington, Massachusetts, is under criminal investigation. The reason: Shipping, in the fall of 2012, 17,000 vials of a steroid to be injected into the joints or spines of patients suffering chronic pain.
But instead of relieving pain, this steroid–contaminated with fungal meningitis–brought only agony and death.

The vials went out to thousands of pharmacies scattered across 23 states.
Forty-eight people have died, and 720 are still fighting horrific infections caused by the drug.
Just as Ayn Rand would have wanted, the pharmacy managed to avoid supervision by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
NECC was one of thousands of pharmacies that Congress exempted from FDA oversight. The reason: By law, they are allowed to make custom drugs for just one patient at a time.
But within a few years, NECC went national–and vastly expanded the quantities of drugs produced.
“The underlying factor is that the company got greedy and overextended and we got sloppy, and something happened,” John Connolly, a lab technician for the company, told 60 Minutes, the CBS news magazine.
And, also as Rand would have wanted, the four family members who founded the pharmacy were enriched by it–receiving over $16 million in wages and profits, from December 2011 through November 2012.

Bankruptcy records show the family members racked up $90,000 on corporate American Express credit cards, including charges made after the company shut down in early October.
A month before the first steroid death, Connolly says he warned his supervisor: “Something’s gonna happen, something’s gonna get missed and we’re gonna get shut down.”
His supervisor just shrugged.
NECC was shut down by the authorities. Barry Cadden, the president and lead pharmacist of the company, was subpoenaed by Congress to testify. In true gangster fashion, he pleaded the Fifth.
He claims he doesn’t know how the contamination started.
Which brings us back to Ayn Rand–and, more specifically, Ayn Rand Nation.
Among the themes explored in Weiss’ book:
- Atlas Shrugged–Rand’s 1957 novel–depicts a United States where many of society’s most productive citizens refuse to be exploited by increasing taxation and government regulations and go on strike. The refusal evokes the imagery of what would happen if the mythological Atlas refused to continue to hold up the world. The novel continues to influence those who aren’t hard-core Rand followers, who are known as Objectivists.
- Ayn Rand’s novels dramatically affirm such bedrock American values as independence, creativity, self-reliance, and above all, a permanent distrust of government.
- In Rand’s 1936 novel, We the Living–set in Soviet Russia–her heroine, Kira Argounova, tells a Communist: “I loathe your ideals; I admire your methods.” Objectivists believe in defending capitalism with the same ruthless methods of Communists.
- In Rand’s ideal world, government would control only police, armies and law courts. To her, a government which performs more than these three functions is not simply impractical or expensive: it is evil.
Many of those who embrace Rand substitute rage for logic: Tea Partiers are furious about the 2008 Wall Street crash, yet they blame the government for it.
(Ironically, in a way, they are right: The government can be blamed–but not for too much regulation of greed-fueled capitalists but too little.)
Weiss asserts that Tea Party members resent the social and economic realities facing the nation, but lack a coherent intellectual framework to help them focus and justify their rage. But Objectivists have–and offer–such a framework.
Thus, Tea Partiers form the ideological part of the right wing, and the clarity–and fanaticism–of their views gives them a power far out of proportion to their numbers.
Weiss believes that Rand is presenting a moral argument for laissez-faire capitalism, which means eliminating Social Security, Medicare, public road system, fire departments, parks, building codes–and, above all, any type of financial regulation.
Weiss maintains that Rand’s moral argument must be directly confronted–and defeated–with moral arguments calling for charity and rationality.
Given the fanaticism of Tea Partiers and the right-wing Republicans they support, success in countering Rand’s “I’ve-got-mine-and-the-hell-with-everybody-else” morality is by no means assured.
ABC NEWS, AIRLINES, BUSINESS, CBS NEWS, CNN, COMPUTER SECURITY, CREDIT CARDS, CYBERSECURITY, DAIRY QUEEN, FACEBOOK, JOHN HERING, JPMORGAN/CHASE, LILY TOMLIN, LOOKOUT, LUGGAGE THEFTS, MA BELL, NBC NEWS, ROWAN & MARTIN'S LAUGH-IN, STAPLES, TARGET, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY
“WE DON’T CARE, WE DON’T HAVE TO”
In Bureaucracy, Business, Law, Politics, Social commentary on October 23, 2014 at 2:52 pmComedian Lily Tomlin rose to fame on Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In as Ernestine, the rude, sarcastic switchboard operator for Ma Bell.
She would tap into customers’ calls, interrupt them, make snide remarks about their personal lives. And her victims included celebrities as much as run-of-the-mill customers.
On one occasion, she called then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, letting him know that “it really takes a Hoover [vacuum cleaner] to dig up the dirt.”
She introduced herself as working for “the phone company, serving everyone from presidents and kings to the scum of the earth.”
But perhaps the line for which her character is best remembered was: “We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re the phone company.”
Watching Ernestine on Laugh-In was a blast for millions of TV viewers during the mid-1960s and early 70s. But confronting such corporate arrogance in real-life is no laughing matter.
Clearly, too many companies take the same attitude as Ernestine: “We don’t care. We don’t have to.”
This is especially true for companies that are supposed to safeguard their customers’ most sensitive information–such as their credit card numbers, addresses, emails and phone numbers.
An October 22 “commentary” published in Forbes magazine raises the highly disturbing question: “Cybersecurity: Does Corporate America Really Care?”
And the answer is apparently: No.
Its author is John Hering, co-founder and executive director of Lookout, which bills itself as “the world leader in mobile security for consumers and enterprises alike.”
Click here: Cybersecurity: Does corporate America really care?
October proved a bad month for credit card-using customers of Kmart, Staples and Dairy Queen–all of which have reported data breaches involving the theft of credit card numbers.
Earlier breaches had hit Target, Home Depot and JPMorgan/Chase.
“One thing is clear,” writes Hering. “CEOs need to put security on their strategic agendas alongside revenue growth and other issues given priority in boardrooms.”
Hering warns that “CEOs don’t seem to be making security a priority.” And he offers several reasons for this:
“There’s a short-term mindset and denial of convenience in board rooms,” writes Hering.
“Top executives don’t realize their systems are vulnerable and don’t understand the risks. Sales figures and new products are top of mind; shoring up IT systems aren’t.”
Anyone who’s ever watched the operation of an airport luggage carousel has seen this principle in action.
If you’ve checked your luggage, then you need to head for the baggage carousel as quickly as you can get out of the airplane.
Because if you don’t get there in time to grab your own bag, there’s a good chance that someone else will.
The reason? There’s no security officer there to make sure that your luggage goes only to you, and not to someone else.
Experienced baggage thieves know this. So they wait at the luggage carousel for a piece of luggage to go around two or three times. If no one collects it, they assume the owner isn’t there yet–and make off with it.
Sure, there might not be anything of value in it–from the thief’s viewpoint, anyway.
No diamonds.
No jewels.
No expensive cameras.
For the thief, it’s a setback–but only a minor one. He simply dumps the luggage and perhaps goes back to the carousel for another shot at finding a bag stuffed with valuables.
But for the traveler-victim, it’s a disaster.
Most–if not all–of his clothes are gone.
Anything personal–such as gifts he was bringing for friends or relatives–is gone.
So are any vitally-needed medications–if he was foolish enough to store these in his suitcase instead of a carry-on bag.
And does the airline care?
Don’t be stupid.
Why should they? They got your money when you bought the plane ticket.
That’s all they wanted from you. And the truth is, that’s all they’ve ever wanted from you–even during the “golden age of air travel” before airplanes became “flying buses.”
The skies of United were never so friendly that airlines felt an obligation to ensure that their passengers’ luggage was actually waiting for its rightful owners.
And the same principle–or lack of principle–applies with such companies as banks, department stores and insurance companies that hold the most private information of their customers.
There are two ways corporations can be forced to start behaving responsibly on this issue.
First, some smart attorneys need to start filing class-action lawsuits against companies that don’t take steps to safeguard their customers’ private information.
Second, there must be Federal legislation to ensure that multi-million-dollar fines are levied against such companies–and especially their CEOs–when such data breaches occur.
Only then will the CEO mindset of “We don’t care, we don’t have to” be replaced with: “We care, because our heads will roll if we don’t.”
Share this: