Tag: chief executive officer

The deal is this: FB stock is driven entirely by ad revenues. However, because Facebook is so complicated and a black box when it comes to how the platform engages users and vice-versa, it is very easy for management to just wave their hands and call things “algorithms”. As we roll this out, you’ll see less public content like posts from businesses, brands and media. And the public content you see more will be held to the same standard — it should encourage meaningful interactions between people.” That sounds just lovely, and so does this: “We feel a responsibility to make sure our services aren’t just fun to use, but also good for people’s well-being. Zuckerberg’s politics are well-known. How Facebook’s Politics Affect FB Stock Why does this matter for FB stock shareholders? Anytime a business wades into politics, it is bad for business. In attempting to drive a political agenda, it creates the appearance of a CEO that is more distracted by politics than by just running his business. However, advertisers might. He does not own any stock mentioned.

. Green Bay Packers President and CEO Mark Murphy on Saturday became the latest football executive to respond to President Trump's criticism of NFL players who kneel during the national anthem, calling the president's remarks "divisive." "We strongly believe that players are leaders in our communities and positive influences. They have achieved their positions through tremendous work and dedication and should be celebrated for their success and positive impact." "We believe it is important to support any of our players who choose to peacefully express themselves with the hope of change for good. As Americans, we are fortunate to be able to speak openly and freely." Trump blasted athletes who protest the national anthem during football games during a fiery campaign rally on Friday, saying that NFL coaches should fire players that do so. "Wouldn't you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, 'Get that son of a b---- off the field right now. He is fired,'" he said.

Katherine M. Gehl, former CEO and political innovation activist, and Harvard’s Michael E. Porter reveal how the U.S. political system is no longer designed to serve the public interest, and how it has been reconfigured over time to benefit our major political parties and their industry allies. Report lays out a strategy for reinvigorating our democracy. BOSTON— At a time of high dissatisfaction and distrust with the U.S. political system, Katherine M. Gehl and Michael E. Porter today released new research that illuminates the root causes of why competition in politics is failing to serve the public interest. The parties focus on serving their partisan supporters and special interests, not the average voter, ” said Katherine Gehl, a former CEO, who has also worked in government and is now dedicated to driving political innovation and reform. “This report is not about adding to the depressing national dialog about politics, but about how to understand how the political system actually works and change it through reforms that will matter.” “I was drawn to analyze the U.S. political system as an industry when our research found that our political system is the biggest impediment to U.S. competitiveness,” said Harvard’s Porter, who is based at Harvard Business School and co-chair of the School’s U.S. Competitiveness Project. “Our dysfunctional political outcomes are a competition problem. Our political system will not be self-correcting. For nearly six years, the U.S. Competitiveness Project has conducted in-depth research to identify the necessary steps policymakers and the business community must take to improve U.S. competitiveness. As co-chair of the multiyear, non-partisan U.S. Competitiveness Project at Harvard Business School over the past five years, it became clear to him that the political system was actually the major constraint in America’s inability to restore economic prosperity and address many of the other problems our nation faces. Working with Katherine to understand the root causes of the failure of political competition, and what to do about it, has become an obsession.