Why Does Canadian Media Love Licking This Billionaire's Boots? | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Media

Why Does Canadian Media Love Licking This Billionaire’s Boots?

Published

1 year ago

 on

There is probably no other billionaire in Canada who enjoys as much fawning media coverage as Jim Pattison.

The 94 year old is the namesake of a sprawling empire of businesses and investments ranging from supermarket chains, advertising billboards, media companies, car dealerships and export terminals (including a stake in a Vancouver coal port). The Jim Pattison Group was the second-largest privately held company in Canada as of January 2021. It has made Pattison himself extremely rich: According to Forbes, his net worth is currently 10.1 billion USD. Rather than enjoying his fortune in his old age, Pattison continues to work full time.

Pattison’s large economic footprint means that his name comes up often in news articles and broadcasts, particularly in Western Canada. But despite his immense power and some of his companies’ cruel policies toward workers in recent years, these stories are almost never directly critical. In fact, they regularly take the form of embarrassing puff pieces that praise his business acumen, ‘self-made man’ narrative and philanthropy.

The most recent one of these articles I could find was a piece in The Globe and Mail, written by Trevor Cole. It is among the most cringeworthy piles of dog shit I’ve ever read.

The piece, published on February 22, investigated a deeply probing question, with the headline reading: “Billionaire Jimmy Pattison is 94 and goes to work every day. What’s his secret?” In exploring this question, the article contained nuggets of wisdom like “back in the 1960s […] [Pattison] was driven by unknown forces,” and, “His value as an example of what any Canadian with an insatiable appetite for business success can achieve […] might be immeasurable.”

The article then led into a transcript of a Zoom interview with the tycoon himself, and included questions such as, “Was there ever a time when your courage failed you?” “No,” Pattison replied — and with media coverage like this, who can be surprised by this answer? Later on in the interview, Pattison revealed that following his role as CEO of the Expo 86 fair in Vancouver, British Columbia’s then-governing right-wing Social Credit Party “offered [him] the job as premier.” Rather than dwelling on this eyebrow-raising piece of political history for too long, the interview meandered onto more important subjects, like Pattison’s childhood trumpet playing.

Cole is an accomplished novelist and journalist. No one at the Globe forced him to write this article, which is just one of several recent pieces about Pattison from other journalists that provide stiff competition for who can lick the billionaire’s boots most enthusiastically.

For example, last December, a CTV News article opened with the laughable suggestion that Pattison, whose name is literally scrawled across billboards all over Western Canada, “has little desire to maintain a high profile.” The piece then highlighted the “massive” cheques the billionaire regularly cuts for hospital foundations, which, the author assured readers, are “grateful for the cash.” The article included some other risible lines, such as “[Pattison] was characteristically humble about his contributions.” Although the article seemed to try its best to convince readers otherwise, it was not a paid advertorial.

In July 2021, the Financial Post ran a story headlined: “Who’s Jim Pattison? Empire builder and billionaire — just don’t call him ‘Canada’s Warren Buffett.’” Like all such pieces, it trod the tired path of retelling Patitson’s business hagiography and describing his busy work routine, before turning to the billionaire’s new interest in being “friendly to the environment.” As the article notes, Pattison made a large part of his fortune from industries with major greenhouse gas emissions, including in coal export terminals. But rather than dwell on this uncomfortable fact, the article, like the Globe piece mentioned above, moved hastily along to discuss Pattison’s musical hobbies in his boyhood.

These puff pieces represent only some of the most prominent examples of how Pattison is lauded in dominant media. I searched every mention of Jim Pattison by name (excluding those that only referred to his namesake companies and organizations, of which there are many) between February 2022 and February 2023 in the Canadian Newsstream database. Of the 23 articles that fit this criteria in the search, just one, a plucky editorial in the Prince George Citizen published on January 19, levelled any kind of direct criticism against Pattison. It concerned the Pattison-invested company Canfor, and its decision to cut 300 jobs at a pulp mill in Prince George.

The editorial made an admirable (if slightly naive) call to boycott Pattison’s businesses: “Why should the out-of-work employees give their severance cheques back to Pattison by shopping at the four Save-On-Foods stores in Prince George? Why should they listen to the two Pattison radio stations and watch the Pattison TV station? Seeing as Canfor is closing the Prince George pulp line to protect Pattison’s bottom line, it’s time for Prince George residents to show their dissatisfaction by protecting their own bottom line and hitting Pattison’s pocketbook.”

Every other article I could find in the archive during this year-long period, however, was either a dry account of Pattison’s business affairs, or a piece of glowing coverage of his career and charitable donations. In one such piece, former Jim Pattison Group president and COO Glen Clark (a trailblazer in the emerging B.C. NDP premier to corporate ghoul pipeline) told the Vancouver Sun that “Jimmy’s been a great mentor to me. […] I would argue he’s the most successful business guy in our time, so you learn a lot.” In another piece, the Sun referred to Pattison as a “local business legend.”

Notwithstanding his highly publicized philanthropy, Pattison saw his wealth grow by $7.2 billion one year into the pandemic. His net worth is now close to $10 billion higher than at the pandemic’s onset in March 2020. In the summer of 2020, Pattison Group’s Save-On-Foods grocery chain clawed back its workers’ $2-per-hour hazard pay, while Pattison himself shamelessly boasted to local media that, “We’ve never been in better shape to invest. The question now is, where do we feel comfortable?”

This is part of a long history of Pattison’s companies’ poor treatment of workers. During the 1980s, his supermarket chains were staffed by large numbers of non-union and part-time workers. In 1993, Save-On-Foods management insisted that workers in Alberta accept pay cuts, and in 1996 the company locked out UFCW members so that it could pay new hires a lower starting wage. In 2008, Pattison’s Overwaitea company pressured unionized staff to work two-hour shifts, in a move the union’s communications representative called “shocking.” These are just a few examples.

And while one of Pattison’s hands writes sizeable cheques for hospital foundations (don’t forget that charitable donations also provide the rich with tax relief), his other hand has for decades made handsome donations to the very right-wing political parties that spent years gutting public health services and other social programs designed to help some of the most vulnerable. Ahead of the 2021 federal election, he vociferously spoke out against modest economic redistribution proposals, like a wealth tax, invoking the age-old threat of capital flight.

In the same interview, Pattison praised the Conservative Party and claimed that federal emergency support payments for workers during the COVID-19 pandemic “disincentivized people from returning to the workforce” (as the interviewer phrased it), a myth constantly invoked by bosses furious at an apparent uptick in workers’ bargaining power for better wages.

If Pattison was a politician, the credulous kind of reporting on him cited above would rightly never be tolerated by serious journalists and the broader public. And yet Pattison’s vast business empire, which reportedly employs more than 49,500 people, arguably has more direct control over the lives of its workers — not to mention the consumers with little choice but to buy essential goods from his oligopolistic corporations — than some politicians. His wealth, like that of all billionaires, is built on the backs of underpaid workers and squeezed consumers.

So why do so many in the media give this incredibly powerful man a virtual free pass? It’s possible that Pattison’s economic leverage and advertising dollars play some kind of pressuring role, but more fundamentally, it’s a sign that within dominant media, there’s a deeply embedded ideological assumption that accountability ought to be subject to different rules when it’s discussed in the context of the private sector.

Of course, these outlets do sometimes provide critical coverage of other billionaires and powerful business people. But the fact that they so readily and enthusiastically regurgitate Pattison’s trite, self-made philanthropist narrative, which is just as slick and carefully curated as any politician’s PR operation, while largely ignoring or glossing over his anti-worker views and actions, indicates a degree of credulity and/or capture that would never be taken seriously if applied to a public official.

Pattison is a true capitalist, and so no one should expect him to do anything other than hoard as much wealth as he can at the expense of his workers in his twilight years. But there’s no excuse for media outlets to give him such an easy ride. That Pattison will likely go to his grave in the next few years never again feeling serious heat from mainstream journalistic scrutiny is an embarrassment to the profession.

 

Source link

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Media

Trump could cash out his DJT stock within weeks. Here’s what happens if he sells

Published

3 weeks ago

 on

August 23, 2024

By

Former President Donald Trump is on the brink of a significant financial decision that could have far-reaching implications for both his personal wealth and the future of his fledgling social media company, Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG). As the lockup period on his shares in TMTG, which owns Truth Social, nears its end, Trump could soon be free to sell his substantial stake in the company. However, the potential payday, which makes up a large portion of his net worth, comes with considerable risks for Trump and his supporters.

Trump’s stake in TMTG comprises nearly 59% of the company, amounting to 114,750,000 shares. As of now, this holding is valued at approximately $2.6 billion. These shares are currently under a lockup agreement, a common feature of initial public offerings (IPOs), designed to prevent company insiders from immediately selling their shares and potentially destabilizing the stock. The lockup, which began after TMTG’s merger with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC), is set to expire on September 25, though it could end earlier if certain conditions are met.

Should Trump decide to sell his shares after the lockup expires, the market could respond in unpredictable ways. The sale of a substantial number of shares by a major stakeholder like Trump could flood the market, potentially driving down the stock price. Daniel Bradley, a finance professor at the University of South Florida, suggests that the market might react negatively to such a large sale, particularly if there aren’t enough buyers to absorb the supply. This could lead to a sharp decline in the stock’s value, impacting both Trump’s personal wealth and the company’s market standing.

Moreover, Trump’s involvement in Truth Social has been a key driver of investor interest. The platform, marketed as a free speech alternative to mainstream social media, has attracted a loyal user base largely due to Trump’s presence. If Trump were to sell his stake, it might signal a lack of confidence in the company, potentially shaking investor confidence and further depressing the stock price.

Trump’s decision is also influenced by his ongoing legal battles, which have already cost him over $100 million in legal fees. Selling his shares could provide a significant financial boost, helping him cover these mounting expenses. However, this move could also have political ramifications, especially as he continues his bid for the Republican nomination in the 2024 presidential race.

Trump Media’s success is closely tied to Trump’s political fortunes. The company’s stock has shown volatility in response to developments in the presidential race, with Trump’s chances of winning having a direct impact on the stock’s value. If Trump sells his stake, it could be interpreted as a lack of confidence in his own political future, potentially undermining both his campaign and the company’s prospects.

Truth Social, the flagship product of TMTG, has faced challenges in generating traffic and advertising revenue, especially compared to established social media giants like X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook. Despite this, the company’s valuation has remained high, fueled by investor speculation on Trump’s political future. If Trump remains in the race and manages to secure the presidency, the value of his shares could increase. Conversely, any missteps on the campaign trail could have the opposite effect, further destabilizing the stock.

As the lockup period comes to an end, Trump faces a critical decision that could shape the future of both his personal finances and Truth Social. Whether he chooses to hold onto his shares or cash out, the outcome will likely have significant consequences for the company, its investors, and Trump’s political aspirations.

Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Arizona man accused of social media threats to Trump is arrested

Published

3 weeks ago

 on

August 23, 2024

By

Cochise County, AZ — Law enforcement officials in Arizona have apprehended Ronald Lee Syvrud, a 66-year-old resident of Cochise County, after a manhunt was launched following alleged death threats he made against former President Donald Trump. The threats reportedly surfaced in social media posts over the past two weeks, as Trump visited the US-Mexico border in Cochise County on Thursday.

Syvrud, who hails from Benson, Arizona, located about 50 miles southeast of Tucson, was captured by the Cochise County Sheriff’s Office on Thursday afternoon. The Sheriff’s Office confirmed his arrest, stating, “This subject has been taken into custody without incident.”

In addition to the alleged threats against Trump, Syvrud is wanted for multiple offences, including failure to register as a sex offender. He also faces several warrants in both Wisconsin and Arizona, including charges for driving under the influence and a felony hit-and-run.

The timing of the arrest coincided with Trump’s visit to Cochise County, where he toured the US-Mexico border. During his visit, Trump addressed the ongoing border issues and criticized his political rival, Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris, for what he described as lax immigration policies. When asked by reporters about the ongoing manhunt for Syvrud, Trump responded, “No, I have not heard that, but I am not that surprised and the reason is because I want to do things that are very bad for the bad guys.”

This incident marks the latest in a series of threats against political figures during the current election cycle. Just earlier this month, a 66-year-old Virginia man was arrested on suspicion of making death threats against Vice President Kamala Harris and other public officials.

Continue Reading

Media

Trump Media & Technology Group Faces Declining Stock Amid Financial Struggles and Increased Competition

Published

3 weeks ago

 on

August 20, 2024

By

Trump Media & Technology Group’s stock has taken a significant hit, dropping more than 11% this week following a disappointing earnings report and the return of former U.S. President Donald Trump to the rival social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter. This decline is part of a broader downward trend for the parent company of Truth Social, with the stock plummeting nearly 43% since mid-July. Despite the sharp decline, some investors remain unfazed, expressing continued optimism for the company’s financial future or standing by their investment as a show of political support for Trump.

One such investor, Todd Schlanger, an interior designer from West Palm Beach, explained his commitment to the stock, stating, “I’m a Republican, so I supported him. When I found out about the stock, I got involved because I support the company and believe in free speech.” Schlanger, who owns around 1,000 shares, is a regular user of Truth Social and is excited about the company’s future, particularly its plans to expand its streaming services. He believes Truth Social has the potential to be as strong as Facebook or X, despite the stock’s recent struggles.

However, Truth Social’s stock performance is deeply tied to Trump’s political influence and the company’s ability to generate sustainable revenue, which has proven challenging. An earnings report released last Friday showed the company lost over $16 million in the three-month period ending in June. Revenue dropped by 30%, down to approximately $836,000 compared to $1.2 million during the same period last year.

In response to the earnings report, Truth Social CEO Devin Nunes emphasized the company’s strong cash position, highlighting $344 million in cash reserves and no debt. He also reiterated the company’s commitment to free speech, stating, “From the beginning, it was our intention to make Truth Social an impenetrable beachhead of free speech, and by taking extraordinary steps to minimize our reliance on Big Tech, that is exactly what we are doing.”

Despite these assurances, investors reacted negatively to the quarterly report, leading to a steep drop in stock price. The situation was further complicated by Trump’s return to X, where he posted for the first time in a year. Trump’s exclusivity agreement with Trump Media & Technology Group mandates that he posts personal content first on Truth Social. However, he is allowed to make politically related posts on other social media platforms, which he did earlier this week, potentially drawing users away from Truth Social.

For investors like Teri Lynn Roberson, who purchased shares near the company’s peak after it went public in March, the decline in stock value has been disheartening. However, Roberson remains unbothered by the poor performance, saying her investment was more about supporting Trump than making money. “I’m way at a loss, but I am OK with that. I am just watching it for fun,” Roberson said, adding that she sees Trump’s return to X as a positive move that could expand his reach beyond Truth Social’s “echo chamber.”

The stock’s performance holds significant financial implications for Trump himself, as he owns a 65% stake in Trump Media & Technology Group. According to Fortune, this stake represents a substantial portion of his net worth, which could be vulnerable if the company continues to struggle financially.

Analysts have described Truth Social as a “meme stock,” similar to companies like GameStop and AMC that saw their stock prices driven by ideological investments rather than business fundamentals. Tyler Richey, an analyst at Sevens Report Research, noted that the stock has ebbed and flowed based on sentiment toward Trump. He pointed out that the recent decline coincided with the rise of U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris as the Democratic presidential nominee, which may have dampened perceptions of Trump’s 2024 election prospects.

Jay Ritter, a finance professor at the University of Florida, offered a grim long-term outlook for Truth Social, suggesting that the stock would likely remain volatile, but with an overall downward trend. “What’s lacking for the true believer in the company story is, ‘OK, where is the business strategy that will be generating revenue?'” Ritter said, highlighting the company’s struggle to produce a sustainable business model.

Still, for some investors, like Michael Rogers, a masonry company owner in North Carolina, their support for Trump Media & Technology Group is unwavering. Rogers, who owns over 10,000 shares, said he invested in the company both as a show of support for Trump and because of his belief in the company’s financial future. Despite concerns about the company’s revenue challenges, Rogers expressed confidence in the business, stating, “I’m in it for the long haul.”

Not all investors are as confident. Mitchell Standley, who made a significant return on his investment earlier this year by capitalizing on the hype surrounding Trump Media’s planned merger with Digital World Acquisition Corporation, has since moved on. “It was basically just a pump and dump,” Standley told ABC News. “I knew that once they merged, all of his supporters were going to dump a bunch of money into it and buy it up.” Now, Standley is staying away from the company, citing the lack of business fundamentals as the reason for his exit.

Truth Social’s future remains uncertain as it continues to struggle with financial losses and faces stiff competition from established social media platforms. While its user base and investor sentiment are bolstered by Trump’s political following, the company’s long-term viability will depend on its ability to create a sustainable revenue stream and maintain relevance in a crowded digital landscape.

As the company seeks to stabilize, the question remains whether its appeal to Trump’s supporters can translate into financial success or whether it will remain a volatile stock driven more by ideology than business fundamentals.

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version