Government
How dual loyalties created an ethics problem for Chris Cuomo and CNN
A journalist’s role is to serve the public interest. But CNN anchor Chris Cuomo, by helping his brother, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo during a scandal, put personal interests above the public’s.
Share this:
CNN anchor Chris Cuomo conceded in March, 2021 that he could not, ethically, cover the sexual harassment allegations against his brother, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo. The family ties were simply too strong for him to do so independently.
But afterwards, Chris provided behind-the-scenes counsel to his brother and his brother’s team. By August, 2021, when Andrew resigned in the wake of the scandal, there were calls for Chris to step down from his job as well because the New York attorney general’s initial report revealed that he had helped draft a statement for his brother in February. As the adage has it, no one can serve two masters. The CNN anchor who should have been serving the public was secretly putting family loyalty first by helping his brother navigate a political and public relations disaster.
And now CNN has fired Cuomo. The firing happened on Dec. 4, less than a week after the attorney general’s office released pages of transcripts, exhibits and videos from its investigation into sexual harassment allegations against Andrew Cuomo. The documents detailed the extensive help Chris Cuomo had been providing to his brother for months.
Viewers of CNN would have known about the cozy familial relationship between the two. In 2020, when Andrew Cuomo was still governor of New York, Chris teamed up with his brother to banter on the cable network about how the state was handling the pandemic. The segments were wildly popular.
Although they raised eyebrows in media ethics circles because Chris Cuomo appeared to be violating fundamental norms of journalistic independence. CNN justified its exception to a conflict of interest rule imposed since 2013 prohibiting the anchor from covering his brother, stating, “Chris speaking with his brother about the challenges of what millions of American families were struggling with was of significant human interest.”
And, incidentally, the banter was great for ratings. But the sexual harassment scandal that erupted in late 2020 put an end to all that.
But it did not end the behind-the-scenes conflict.
Public interest above self-interest
As Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel – former journalists and now ethics scholars and media watchdogs – have written, “[Journalists] must strive to put the public interest – and the truth – above their own self-interest or assumptions.”
Journalists’ fundamental role in democracy is to hold those in power, especially those in government, accountable. But if they have close relationships with those in power, their independence, or at least the perception of it, can be compromised. Independence coupled with accountability and transparency underpin the public’s trust in journalists.
But goodwill towards Chris Cuomo, who the Washington Post reported was “known for his intense loyalty to the network, its employees and their families,” along with the unwavering support of CNN President Jeff Zucker, helped Cuomo keep his job.
He stayed in it until the Nov. 29 document dump disclosed just how closely the CNN anchor had helped his brother Andrew’s team frame and mount a defense to the accusations. Among the offers Chris made: he would work his own journalistic sources to investigate the credibility of the women who alleged harassment or assault.
At that point, CNN suspended Cuomo “indefinitely.”
“When Chris admitted to us that he had offered advice to his brother’s staff, he broke our rules and we acknowledged that publicly,” CNN said in a statement. “But we also appreciated the unique position he was in and understood his need to put family first and job second.”
Cuomo’s firing followed four days later.
‘Accountable and transparent’
Was it ethical for the anchor to continue to advise his brother while representing to his viewers that he was keeping his relationship at arm’s length? Should he even have participated in what a Donald Trump campaign spokesman called “the Cuomo Brothers Comedy Hour” at the beginning of the pandemic?
Journalists’ associations have developed ethical codes and guidelines that address this situation.
One of the oldest and best known is the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ). News organizations also have their own ethics rules and post them online so that the public can read them. Television networks frequently assign ethics enforcement to their “Standards and Practices” departments.
These codes set out the ethical standards for a news operation.
But the word “code” is a misnomer. Although news organizations are free to enforce their provisions on their own staff, they are not intended to create legal obligations to anyone else, as with licensed professions such as law and medicine. The SPJ Code is explicit about this, emphasizing that its code is “not, nor can it be under the First Amendment, legally enforceable.”
It does, however, emphasize that conflicts of interest must be avoided, or at the very least, disclosed, to maintain independence and transparency.
CNN has acknowledged that Chris Cuomo “broke our rules.” But the rules aren’t posted on CNN’s website. In fact, CNN has fought to keep them secret.
In August, the Washington Post quoted from a leaked copy of the network’s “News Standards & Practices Policy Guide,” reporting that “the document mandates that ‘CNN employees should avoid any real obligation or appearance of any obligation to any interest that he/she may be covering or reporting on,’ and ‘should avoid conflicts between personal interests and the interest of the company or even the appearance of such conflicts.’”
That sounds about right, but did CNN enforce those rules with Chris Cuomo? How could the anchor avoid conflicts of interest while pitching softball questions to his brother during the pandemic, much less by providing behind-the-scenes advice on how to deal with the sexual harassment scandal?
Many media commentators say that he couldn’t, and now, CNN seems to agree.
Fool me once
Was it unrealistic to expect the Cuomo brothers not to confer in times of crisis? Some news consumers think so, as reader comments on a Nov. 30 New York Times story contended: “One of the biggest draws to CNN is Chris Cuomo & his personalized brotherly banter & friendship with Don Lemon. He reflects what’s right in America. Family & Loyalty.”
Those readers are right that it is a question of loyalty. But they are answering the question differently than many journalists would.
Kovach and Rosenstiel have written that journalists’ “first loyalty is to citizens,” and in their book The Elements of Journalism call it an “implied covenant” with the audience.
As columnist Margaret Sullivan argued in the Washington Post, “You don’t abuse your position in journalism — whether at a weekly newspaper or a major network — for personal or familial gain.”
Conflicts of interest violate that covenant and undermine public confidence in media independence. Some conflicts of interest are such a problem that no amount of disclosure or disclaimers can cure them. CNN has apparently concluded that Chris Cuomo’s is one of them.
Jane E Kirtley serves on the board of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) Foundation, and was a member of the SPJ National Ethics Committee for several years. She reviewed Minnesota Public Radio's News Ethics Guidelines https://www.mprnews.org/ethics prior to adoption, and has written book chapters and articles on media ethics for a variety of publications. She is co-author of a textbook, Media Ethics Today: Issues, Analysis, Solutions (Cognella 2016).
trump andrew cuomo governor pandemic
International
You can strike gold and silver investment opportunities at Costco
Costco (NDAQ:COST), known for its wide array of products, also offers a distinct opportunity for investors: gold and silver.
The post You can strike gold…
Share this:
With gold prices hovering around all-time highs, one of the top warehouse retailers and Canada’s favourite grocer has brought the precious metal to its consumers.
Costco (NDAQ:COST), known for its wide array of products ranging from groceries to electronics and sporting goods, also offers a distinct opportunity for investors: precious metals. While the retail giant might not be the first place that comes to mind when thinking about gold and silver investments, Costco’s offerings in Canada have caught the attention of savvy investors looking to diversify their portfolios.
Let’s delve into what Costco Canada has to offer in terms of gold and silver investments and explore the potential benefits and considerations.
Gold and silver bullion at CostcoCostco began selling 1-ounce 24-karat gold bars, in the United States in October 2023 priced around US$2,000 and sold more than US$100 million by November.
Observing Costco shoppers can provide interesting economic and cultural indicators. Just like the early days of COVID-19 in 2020 when consumers emptied pallets of toilet paper, the supplies of gold and silver at Costco might reveal how confident the public is in Canadian currency and the economy.
Costco Canada stocks a selection of gold and silver bullion available online at Costco.ca, providing investors with the opportunity to add physical precious metals to their investment portfolios. Gold and silver bullion are typically offered in the form of bars or coins, each carrying intrinsic value based on the metal content.
(Source: Costco.ca) Benefits of investing in gold and silver Portfolio diversification: Gold and silver have historically served as a hedge against inflation and economic uncertainty. By adding precious metals to their portfolios, investors can diversify risk and potentially protect their wealth during times of market volatility. Tangible assets: Unlike stocks or bonds, which exist only as digital entries or paper certificates, gold and silver bullion offer investors tangible assets they can hold in their hands. This physical presence can provide a sense of security and stability, especially during turbulent economic times. Liquidity: Gold and silver are globally recognized as valuable commodities, making them liquid assets. Investors can easily buy and sell gold and silver bullion in various markets around the world, providing flexibility and accessibility. Store of value: Throughout history, gold and silver have maintained their value over the long term. While fiat currencies may depreciate because of factors such as inflation, political instability or economic crises, precious metals have proven to retain their purchasing power over time. Considerations when investing in precious metals Price volatility: Like any investment, the prices of gold and silver can fluctuate based on supply and demand dynamics, geopolitical events, and macroeconomic factors. Investors should be prepared for price volatility and hold a long-term perspective. Storage and security: Owning physical precious metals requires adequate storage and security measures to protect against theft or damage. Investors might opt for secure vault storage services or invest in home safes to safeguard their bullion. Transaction costs: When buying and selling gold and silver bullion, investors might incur transaction costs such as premiums, commissions or storage fees. It’s essential to factor these expenses into investment decisions to accurately assess potential returns. Costco also marks up its precious metals at a few hundred dollars above its market value, but you will likely find it slightly cheaper than what the big Canadian banks offer, if their stock isn’t sold out. Market timing: Timing the market is notoriously difficult, and attempting to predict short-term price movements in gold and silver can be challenging. Instead, focus on the long-term fundamentals and consider dollar-cost averaging as a strategy to mitigate market timing risk. Why buy gold and silver at Costco?Already up more than 5 per cent since the beginning of the year, the value of gold is expected to continue to climb this year. Earlier this month it hit record highs above $2,181/oz. as speculation rises around the prospects of June interest rate cuts.
… but is it a good investment?In an interview with CBC Radio’s The Current, Will Huggins, an associate professor of finance and economics at McMaster University’s DeGroote School of Business called this a good marketing strategy by Costco, but believed that buying gold from Costco doesn’t offer any advantage compared with the big Canadian banks.
“It’s not like a herd of cattle or some land or a corporate entity that we can keep bringing new people into,” he said. “It’s just a yellow rock.”
(Source: Costco Wholesale Corp.)
Final thoughts on buying gold and silver
Costco Canada’s offering of gold and silver bullion presents an intriguing opportunity for investors seeking to diversify their portfolios with tangible assets.
Investors are looking for inflation-proof opportunities and as Stockhouse’s recent Thematic Insights report details, the gold supply has remained essentially flat over time, so it is never diluted and is essentially immune to inflation.
Whether you’re a seasoned investor looking to bolster your portfolio’s resilience or a newcomer exploring alternative investment avenues, the availability of gold and silver bullion at Costco Canada may offer a convenient and accessible option to incorporate precious metals into your investment strategy.
While investing in precious metals carries certain benefits and considerations, it is important for investors to conduct due diligence, assess their risk tolerance, and consult with financial professionals before making investment decisions. As with any investment, prudent decision-making and a long-term perspective are key to navigating the complexities of the financial markets.
Costco Wholesale Corp. (NDAQ:COST) stock last traded at US$725.63 on the NASDAQ and C$34.01 per share on the NEO Exchange.
Join the discussion: Find out what everybody’s saying about this stock on the Costco Wholesale Corp. Bullboard, and check out the rest of Stockhouse’s stock forums and message boards.
The material provided in this article is for information only and should not be treated as investment advice. For full disclaimer information, please click here.
The post You can strike gold and silver investment opportunities at Costco appeared first on The Market Online Canada.
bonds covid-19 nasdaq stocks currencies commodities gold canadaGovernment
Supreme Court Rules Public Officials May Block Their Constituents On Social Media
Supreme Court Rules Public Officials May Block Their Constituents On Social Media
Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis…
Share this:
Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
Public officials may block people on social media in certain situations, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously on March 15.
At the same time, the court held that public officials who post about topics pertaining to their work on their personal social media accounts are acting on behalf of the government. But such officials can be found liable for violating the First Amendment only when they have been properly authorized by the government to communicate on its behalf.
The case is important because nowadays public officials routinely reach out to voters through social media on the same pages where they discuss personal matters unrelated to government business.
“When a government official posts about job-related topics on social media, it can be difficult to tell whether the speech is official or private,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the nation’s highest court.
The case is separate from but brings to mind a lawsuit that several individuals previously filed against former President Donald Trump after he blocked them from accessing his social media account on Twitter, which was later renamed X. The Supreme Court dismissed that case, Biden v. Knight First Amendment Institute, in April 2021 as moot because President Trump had already left office.
At the time of the ruling, the then-Twitter had banned President Trump. When Elon Musk took over the company he reversed that policy.
The new decision in Lindke v. Freed was written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett.
Respondent James Freed, the city manager of Port Huron, Michigan, used a public Facebook account to communicate with his constituents. Petitioner Kevin Lindke, a resident of Port Huron, criticized the municipality’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including accusations of hypocrisy by local officials.
Mr. Freed blocked Mr. Lindke and others and removed their comments, according to Mr. Lindke’s petition.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled for Mr. Freed, finding that he was acting only in a personal capacity and that his activities did not constitute governmental action.
Mr. Freed’s attorney, Victoria Ferres, said during oral arguments before the Supreme Court on Oct. 31, 2023, that her client didn’t give up his rights when using social media.
“This country’s 21 million government employees should have the right to talk publicly about their jobs on personal social media accounts like their private-sector counterparts.”
The position advocated by the other side would unfairly punish government officials, and “will result in uncertainty and self-censorship for this country’s government employees despite this Court repeatedly finding that government employees do not lose their rights merely by virtue of public employment,” she said.
In Lindke v. Freed, the Supreme Court found that a public official who prevents a person from comments on the official’s social media pages engages in governmental action under Section 1983 only if the official had “actual authority” to speak on the government’s behalf on a specific matter and if the official claimed to exercise that authority when speaking in the relevant social media posts.
Section 1983 refers to Title 42, U.S. Code, Section 1983, which allows people to sue government actors for deprivation of civil rights.
Justice Barrett wrote that according to the so-called state action doctrine, the test for “actual authority” must be “rooted in written law or longstanding custom to speak for the State.”
“That authority must extend to speech of the sort that caused the alleged rights deprivation. If the plaintiff cannot make this threshold showing of authority, he cannot establish state action.”
“For social-media activity to constitute state action, an official must not only have state authority—he must also purport to use it,” the justice continued.
“State officials have a choice about the capacity in which they choose to speak.”
Citing previous precedent, Justice Barrett wrote that generally a public employee claiming to speak on behalf of the government acts with state authority when he speaks “in his official capacity or” when he uses his speech to carry out “his responsibilities pursuant to state law.”
“If the public employee does not use his speech in furtherance of his official responsibilities, he is speaking in his own voice.”
The Supreme Court remanded the case to the 6th Circuit with instructions to vacate its judgment and ordered it to conduct “further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
Also on March 15, the Supreme Court ruled on O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier, a related case. The court’s sparse, unanimous opinion was unsigned.
Petitioners Michelle O’Connor-Ratcliff and T.J. Zane were two elected members of the Poway Unified School District Board of Trustees in California who used their personal Facebook and Twitter accounts to communicate with the public.
Respondents Christopher Garnier and Kimberly Garnier, parents of local students, “spammed Petitioners’ posts and tweets with repetitive comments and replies” so the school board members blocked the respondents from the accounts, according to the petition filed by Ms. O’Connor-Ratcliff and Mr. Zane.
But the Garniers said they were acting in good faith.
“The Garniers left comments exposing financial mismanagement by the former superintendent as well as incidents of racism,” the couple said in a brief.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit found in favor of the Garniers, holding that elected officials using social media accounts were participating in a public forum.
The Supreme Court ruled in a three-page opinion that because the 9th Circuit deviated from the standard the high court articulated in Lindke v. Freed, the 9th Circuit’s decision must be vacated.
The case was remanded to the 9th Circuit “for further proceedings consistent with our opinion” in the Lindke case, the Supreme Court stated.
International
Home buyers must now navigate higher mortgage rates and prices
Rates under 4% came and went during the Covid pandemic, but home prices soared. Here’s what buyers and sellers face as the housing season ramps up.
Share this:
Springtime is spreading across the country. You can see it as daffodil, camellia, tulip and other blossoms start to emerge.
You can also see it in the increasing number of for sale signs popping up in front of homes, along with the painting, gardening and general sprucing up as buyers get ready to sell.
Which leads to two questions:
- How is the real estate market this spring?
- Where are mortgage rates?
What buyers and sellers face
The housing market is bedeviled with supply shortages, high prices and slow sales.
Mortgage rates are still high and may limit what a buyer can offer and a seller can expect.
Related: Analyst warns that a TikTok ban could lead to major trouble for Apple, Big Tech
And there's a factor not expected that may affect the sales process. Fixed commission rates on home sales are going away in July.
Reports this week and in a week will make the situation clearer for buyers and sellers.
The reports are:
- Housing starts from the U.S. Commerce Department due Tuesday. The consensus estimate is for a seasonally adjusted rate of about 1.4 million homes. These would include apartments, both rentals and condominiums.
- Existing home sales, due Thursday from the National Association of Realtors. The consensus estimate is for a seasonally adjusted sales rate of about 4 million homes. In 2023, some 4.1 million homes were sold, the worst sales rate since 1995.
- New-home sales and prices, due Monday from the Commerce Department. Analysts are expecting a sales rate of 661,000 homes (including condos), up 1.5% from a year ago.
Here is what buyers and sellers need to know about the situation.
Mortgage rates will stay above 5%
That's what most analysts believe. Right now, the rate on a 30-year mortgage is between 6.7% and 7%.
Rates peaked at 8% in October after the Federal Reserve signaled it was done raising interest rates.
The Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey of March 14 was at 6.74%.
Freddie Mac buys mortgages from lenders and sells securities to investors. The effect is to replenish lenders' cash levels to make more loans.
A hotter-than-expected Producer Price Index released that day has pushed quotes to 7% or higher, according to data from Mortgage News Daily, which tracks mortgage markets.
TheStreet
On a median-priced home (price: $380,000) and a 20% down payment, that means a principal and interest rate payment of $2,022. The payment does not include taxes and insurance.
Last fall when the 30-year rate hit 8%, the payment would have been $2,230.
In 2021, the average rate was 2.96%, which translated into a payment of $1,275.
Short of a depression, that's a rate that won't happen in most of our lifetimes.
Most economists believe current rates will fall to around 6.3% by the end of the year, maybe lower, depending on how many times the Federal Reserve cuts rates this year.
If 6%, the payment on our median-priced home is $1,823.
But under 5%, absent a nasty recession, fuhgettaboutit.
Supply will be tight, keeping prices up
Two factors are affecting the supply of homes for sale in just about every market.
First: Homeowners who had been able to land a mortgage at 2.96% are very reluctant to sell because they would then have to find a home they could afford with, probably, a higher-cost mortgage.
More economic news:
- Fed members just hat-tipped what's next for interest rates
- Retail sales tumble clouds impact of inflation data
- Jobs report shocker: 353,000 hires crush forecasts, stokes inflation fears
Second, the combination of high prices and high mortgage rates are freezing out thousands of potential buyers, especially those looking for homes in lower price ranges.
Indeed, The Wall Street Journal noted that online brokerage Redfin said only about 20% of homes for sale in February were affordable for the typical household.
And here mortgage rates can play one last nasty trick. If rates fall, that means a buyer can afford to pay more. Sellers and their real-estate agents know this too, and may ask for a higher price.
Covid's last laugh: An inflation surge
Mortgage rates jumped to 8% or higher because since 2022 the Federal Reserve has been fighting to knock inflation down to 2% a year. Raising interest rates was the ammunition to battle rising prices.
In June 2022, the consumer price index was 9.1% higher than a year earlier.
The causes of the worst inflation since the 1970s were:
- Covid-19 pandemic, which caused the global economy to shut down in 2020. When Covid ebbed and people got back to living their lives, getting global supply chains back to normal operation proved difficult.
- Oil prices jumped to record levels because of the recovery from the pandemic recovery and Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
What the changes in commissions means
The long-standing practice of paying real-estate agents will be retired this summer, after the National Association of Realtors settled a long and bitter legal fight.
No longer will the seller necessarily pay 6% of the sale price to split between buyer and seller agents.
Both sellers and buyers will have to negotiate separately the services agents have charged for 100 years or more. These include pre-screening properties, writing sales contracts, and the like. The change will continue a trend of adding costs and complications to the process of buying or selling a home.
Already, interest rates are a complication. In addition, homeowners insurance has become very pricey, especially in communities vulnerable to hurricanes, tornadoes, and forest fires. Florida homeowners have seen premiums jump more than 102% in the last three years. A policy now costs three times more than the national average.
Related: Veteran fund manager picks favorite stocks for 2024
recession depression pandemic covid-19 stocks fed federal reserve home sales mortgage rates real estate mortgages housing market recovery interest rates oil russia ukraine
Mistakes Were Made
Supreme Court Rules Public Officials May Block Their Constituents On Social Media
Gen Z, The Most Pessimistic Generation In History, May Decide The Election
“Extreme Events”: US Cancer Deaths Spiked In 2021 And 2022 In “Large Excess Over Trend”
Harvard Medical School Professor Was Fired Over Not Getting COVID Vaccine
-
Uncategorized3 weeks agoAll Of The Elements Are In Place For An Economic Crisis Of Staggering Proportions
-
International1 week agoEyePoint poaches medical chief from Apellis; Sandoz CFO, longtime BioNTech exec to retire
-
Spread & Containment5 days agoIFM’s Hat Trick and Reflections On Option-To-Buy M&A
-
Uncategorized1 month agoCalifornia Counties Could Be Forced To Pay $300 Million To Cover COVID-Era Program
-
Uncategorized3 weeks agoApparel Retailer Express Moving Toward Bankruptcy
-
Uncategorized1 month agoIndustrial Production Decreased 0.1% in January
-
International1 week agoWalmart launches clever answer to Target’s new membership program
-
Uncategorized1 month agoRFK Jr: The Wuhan Cover-Up & The Rise Of The Biowarfare-Industrial Complex