November 15, 2024

Behind Time Inc. Purchase of American Express Publishing Lies a Long History

After a two-decade-long relationship between the magazine giant Time Inc. and American Express, Time Inc. plans to close quickly on its purchase of American Express’s publishing division.

“This 20-year courtship is finally being consummated in matrimony,” said Ed Kelly, president and chief executive of the American Express Publishing Corporation. He joked in a phone interview that after such a long engagement, there was no reason to delay the wedding; Time says it expects to close the deal by Oct. 1.

On Tuesday, both companies announced that Time Inc. would buy for an undisclosed sum all of American Express’s publishing titles, which include Food Wine and Travel Leisure along with magazines sent to selected American Express card members, like Departures and Black Ink. Time Inc. is adding these magazines to its lifestyle group, with magazines like Sunset, Real Simple and Southern Living.

American Express and Time Inc. have worked together since 1993 through a management services agreement that let them team up on advertising and back-office deals. More recently, the two companies worked on a marketing campaign for the hotel chain Westin that involves Time Inc. magazines like Fortune and Real Simple and American Express magazines like Food Wine and Travel Leisure.

Since 2008, when American Express changed its status to a bank holding company, it has been constrained from engaging in any businesses that are considered nonfinancial activities. That has prevented its magazines from experimenting with new sources of revenue as its competitors have.

“With how the media business is transforming itself and the regulatory environment we have been dealing with at American Express, the clock was kind of ticking for us to decide what way we wanted to go,” Mr. Kelly said.

For the past year, board members from both companies, including John Hayes, chief marketing officer for American Express, and Howard Rosen, senior vice president for Time Inc.’s finance operations, have been discussing the purchase.

Time Inc. has undergone its own internal turmoil in recent years. Laura Lang, who was hired as Time Inc.’s chief executive in December 2011, was involved with the early negotiations. Then in March, Time Warner announced that it planned to spin off its struggling Time Inc. magazine division into a separate publicly traded company and that Ms. Lang would resign.

Joe Ripp, a former Time Warner executive who rejoined the company after Labor Day as Time Inc.’s new chief executive, worked on the final details. But there shouldn’t be too much of a cultural adjustment for both sides. Mr. Kelly noted that he started his career at Time Inc.’s People magazine.

Mr. Ripp was also involved in creating the 1993 management agreement between Time Inc. and American Express. He said in a statement about the purchase “we know their business well.”

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/11/business/media/behind-time-inc-purchase-of-american-express-publishing-lies-a-long-history.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Top Editors Abruptly Leave Village Voice

The tumult that has characterized The Village Voice in recent years resurfaced on Thursday when the top two editors said they were leaving the weekly newspaper.

Will Bourne, who became editor last November, and Jessica Lustig, the deputy editor since January, met with the staff at 11 a.m. on Thursday to announce their departure. In a phone interview, Mr. Bourne said that Christine Brennan, executive editor of Voice Media Group, had told them to lay off, or drastically reduce the roles of, five employees on the 20-person staff. Rather than carry out the cuts, he and Ms. Lustig resigned and left immediately, in the middle of closing next week’s paper.

The turnover at The Village Voice has become something of a pattern as the weekly and its owners have struggled to come to grips with declining revenue and increased competition for readers and advertisers on the Web. When Mr. Bourne took over, he became the sixth editor in chief of the paper since 2005.

“We are both leaving because I was summoned to a meeting and asked to get rid of five people, and we are on a short string already,” said Mr. Bourne, who worked at Fast Company and Inc. magazine before coming to the Voice. “When I was brought in here, I was explicitly told that the bloodletting had come to an end. I have enormous respect for the staff here and the work they have been doing, and I am not going to preside over further layoffs.”

In a statement issued on Thursday afternoon, the Voice Media Group said it would be “instituting further structural and staffing changes at the publication.” It said the changes would include “minimal staff reductions” but denied that five employees would be laid off. The changes, it said, “will ultimately support the ongoing sustainability of The Village Voice.”

The company said Pete Kotz would temporarily lead The Village Voice staff while managers searched for a new editor. Mr. Kotz has been Voice Media Group’s national blogs editor and the assigning editor for its national features program.

Ms. Lustig said she was leaving at the same time as Mr. Bourne because she shared his belief that the paper could not absorb further cuts.

In 2012, Village Voice Media ran into objections from law enforcement officials and civic groups over Backpage.com, a classified Web site that has hosted escort ads. The company split, separating its classified service and selling its chain of 13 weekly newspapers to a group of its former editors and publishers last September. The Village Voice, founded in 1955, has won three Pulitzer Prizes and published the work of Henry Miller, Tom Stoppard and Nat Hentoff.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: May 9, 2013

An earlier version of this article misstated the time of a staff meeting at the Village Voice. It was 11 a.m. Thursday, not p.m.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/10/business/media/top-editors-abruptly-leave-village-voice.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Money, Arena and India Play Into Potential Sale of Kings

The group led by Christopher R. Hansen, a hedge fund manager, and Steven A. Ballmer, the chief executive of Microsoft, had been thought to have the upper hand. It has a tentative agreement to buy 65 percent of the team from the Maloof family and approval to build a new arena from Seattle, where the group hopes to move the team if it wins.

The rival group, which includes the founder of 24-Hour Fitness, Mark S. Mastrov, and Paul E. Jacobs, the chief executive of Qualcomm, has an offer worth about as much and approval to build a new arena in Sacramento. The group has another attraction: Vivek Ranadive.

Ranadive, a software businessman from Silicon Valley who is vice chairman of the Golden State Warriors, will become the face of the Kings if his group is chosen. With deep pockets and extensive contacts, he plans to promote the N.B.A. heavily in his native India and to Indians living in the United States.

Cricket is the most popular sport in India, but several sports, including basketball, vie for the second spot.

“I believe basketball will be the global sport of the 21st century because it can be played by young and old, boys and girls, indoors or outdoors, rich or poor,” Ranadive said this week in a phone interview. “Independent of whether the Kings bid succeeds or not, I’m very committed to making it the No. 2 sport in India.”

The two sets of bidders could learn their fate in the coming days or weeks. On Wednesday, the N.B.A.’s advisory finance and relocation committees met to discuss the offers. They may recommend a bid to the league’s owners this week, although Commissioner David Stern told reporters Wednesday that it would probably take several more weeks before the owners vote on the sale of the team. Either way, the recommendations of the committees are expected to hold sway.

If the group trying to keep the team in Sacramento wins, Ranadive will have to sell his minority stake in the Warriors so he can become the general partner of the Kings. He would then be the first majority owner of Indian descent in the N.B.A. and become an instant celebrity among the Indian diaspora and in India.

His star power in India should help supplement the N.B.A.’s fledgling efforts there. The league opened an office in Mumbai in 2011 and now has six employees looking for ways to market the league. Three N.B.A. games are shown each week on the channel that broadcasts the country’s largest cricket league, and the N.B.A. has started a Web site in India. Several N.B.A. players have traveled to India to hold clinics and promote the sport.

Parallels with the N.B.A.’s efforts in China are often made. Stern, who this month traveled to India for the first time, said the comparisons were unfair because the Chinese have been playing the game far longer, have their own leagues and have produced N.B.A. stars. But the potential for growth in India is enormous, Stern said. India has more than 1.2 billion people and an emerging middle class, many of whom speak English.

“The demographics favor us,” he said. “This is not about finding the next great Indian player, though over time we know it’s inevitable. It’s about working with schools, creating programs. But we’re not unmindful of television, merchandising or events. This is a long-term proposition.”

Ranadive’s drive to raise the profile of the sport in India, while welcomed, will not be a deciding factor in which group gets the Kings. Money may be secondary to which group offers more reassurance about its ability to build an arena, which generates revenue and stabilizes a team’s position in its home city.

“Although the purchase price is important, it’s only one factor,” said Irwin Raij of Foley Lardner, who advises teams on stadium deals and is a former member of the Sacramento First Task Force, which helped the city evaluate options for a new sports complex several years ago. “If you’re the league, you want to make sure the arena deal is real.”

If Ranadive’s group wins, expect him to take some of his marketing and promotional ideas to Sacramento. With the Warriors, he has held Bollywood nights and sold a record number of season-ticket plans partly because so many Indians now follow the team. Ranadive, who attends nearly every home game, created a smartphone application that lets fans follow the team. He has recruited other Indian executives to help promote the sport.

Becoming the face of the Kings, Ranadive said, “could be that catalyst” that catapults the sport in India. “We would have a full-court press on this.”

Howard Beck contributed reporting.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/18/sports/basketball/money-arena-and-india-play-into-potential-sale-of-kings.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Advertising: Nationwide Insurance Teams Up With ‘Mad Men’

The series is “Mad Men,” which begins its sixth season with a two-hour episode Sunday night. Nationwide Insurance has made a deal with AMC, the cable channel that is home to “Mad Men,” to become a season-long sponsor of the series, making this the first time the company has advertised on AMC.

The agreement, which includes sponsorship of other AMC series like “The Walking Dead,” has an estimated value of $2 million to $2.5 million. As part of the deal, Nationwide will run during a coming episode of “Mad Men” a special commercial, styled to resemble a programming vignette. The special spot will be in addition to appearances during the show’s season of regular commercials that are part of the current campaign for Nationwide, which carry the slogan “Join the Nation” and use the actress Julia Roberts as the voice-over announcer.

The special commercial is to feature Matt Jauchius, chief marketing officer at Nationwide, discussing the company’s advertising history, including a memorandum found in the Nationwide archives, which contain materials that date to its founding in 1926 as the Farm Bureau Mutual Automobile Insurance Company.

The memo was written on May 13, 1964, by the Nationwide advertising agency at the time, Ogilvy, Benson Mather, now known as Ogilvy Mather Worldwide. The memo suggested seven possible replacements for what was then the slogan for Nationwide’s ads, “In service with people,” which, Mr. Jauchius said in a phone interview, had been in use “pretty much since the founding” of the company.

The suggestions included “Nationwide is on your side,” “On your side … Nationwide,” “Nationwide … a friend in need from cradle to grave” and “You’d send a friend to Nationwide.” Nationwide executives chose to rework “Nationwide is on your side” into “The man from Nationwide is on your side,” Mr. Jauchius said, adding the first three words to reflect that “we distributed our products through agents” — who, in “a sign of the times,” were referred to as men.

The slogan was changed to “Nationwide is on your side” in 1973, he added, when the company adopted a seven-note jingle that was heard in its commercials for decades.

The memo was signed by an Ogilvy executive named Ted Shaw. Coincidentally, there has been a character on “Mad Men” since the fourth season — an agency executive who is a rival of the principal characters on the series — named Ted Chaough, pronounced “Shaw.” (Chaough appears in Sunday’s episode.)

The educated and affluent viewers who watch “Mad Men,” particularly those ages 18 to 49, “are exactly the people we want to reach,” said Mr. Jauchius, who works in Columbus, Ohio.

Even more appealingly, “the people who watch ‘Mad Men’ love the show and watch it religiously,” he added, “and if they see a brand that supports their passion, it’s something they’ll pay more attention to.”

Mr. Jauchius likened that fervor for the series to the avid viewership of sports programming. Nationwide is a major advertiser on coverage of Nascar races, sponsoring the Nascar Nationwide Series, and with the National Football League playoffs last year, “we became more of a buyer” of commercial time during football games, he said.

The deal between AMC and Nationwide was made during the “upfront” negotiations for the 2012-13 season by the media agency for Nationwide, which is Universal McCann in New York, part of the Mediabrands division of the Interpublic Group of Companies. The script for the special commercial was written by AMC, “in close partnership with the Nationwide brand team,” Mr. Jauchius said. (The agency that creates Nationwide’s regular commercials is McKinney in Durham, N.C., part of Cheil Worldwide.)

Nationwide joins a lengthy list of marketers to work with AMC on producing special commercials for “Mad Men” in addition to running regular spots. Others include BMW; the Dr Pepper Snapple Group, for Canada Dry; the Clorox Company, for Clorox bleach; and Unilever, for six brands like Dove, Hellmann’s and Vaseline.

Because “Mad Men” is about Madison Avenue, it “is in the unique position of enabling us to tell a brand’s story,” said Scott Collins, executive vice president for ad sales at the AMC and WE TV cable channels that are part of AMC Networks.

“We’ve been chasing them and wooing them” to advertise on AMC, Mr. Collins said, referring to Nationwide executives, and thus he was pleasantly surprised when at a meeting he was presented with “this large pitch book, called ‘AMC and “Mad Men” and Nationwide, a Match Made on Madison Avenue,’ ” which recounted the company’s ad heritage.

For instance, Mr. Collins said, when he read the slogan “The man from Nationwide is on your side,” “I thought how perfectly ‘Mad Men’-ish that line is,” referring to a central theme of the series, the unequal treatment of the sexes in the 1960s.

The special commercial is scheduled to run during the June 16 episode of “Mad Men,” he added, the next-to-last of the sixth season.

“It’s a pleasant burden,” Mr. Collins said, to deal with the heightened scrutiny that commercials during “Mad Men” receive, particularly as the series “gets more and more precious as the end nears.” (Plans call for seven seasons.)

“There are lots of times I get an e-mail on a Sunday night about a position,” he added, referring to complaints over a spot’s placement. “The reverse would be, no one cares; I cannot tell you how much they care.”

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/05/business/media/nationwide-insurance-teams-up-with-mad-men.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Bucks: New Credit Card Fees Possible but Unlikely

Some retailers will soon have the option of charging extra fees to customers who pay with credit cards, as a result of a legal settlement in an antitrust lawsuit involving MasterCard, Visa and the big card-issuing banks.

It remains to be seen, however, if any merchants will actually do so.

The National Retail Federation, which wasn’t a party to the suit but which represents thousands of retailers affected by the settlement and opposes the deal, insists there is not broad support among merchants for credit card surcharges. A federation spokesman, Craig Shearman, said in an e-mail that the notion of widespread surcharges is “purely card industry propaganda.”

“While there can always be exceptions, merchants in general have no intention of surcharging,” Mr. Shearman wrote.

As The Times reported previously, a twist involving American Express cards makes it difficult for retailers that accept them to add surcharges for MasterCard and Visa cards.

And despite the settlement, the extra fees are still illegal in 10 states that prohibit credit card surcharges: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Oklahoma and Texas. That means national retailers that have outlets in those states can’t impose them anywhere, according to the federation.

Mallory Duncan, the federation’s general counsel, said in a short phone interview that surcharge rules in the settlement are overly complex and favorable to the card industry.

The upshot, Mr. Duncan said, is that the settlement merely serves to provide cover to card companies to deflect criticism of their “swipe” fees, which merchants pay to banks when customers pay with credit cards. The fees typically range from 1.5 to 3 percent or more of the purchase amount. The federation has said it is exploring its “legal options.”

But in theory, at least, the fees could begin showing up as soon as late January, as a result of a preliminary settlement entered in the case in November, according to the lawyers who brought the suit. In the event that some retailers charge the extra fee, the group Consumer Action has published a pamphlet to help consumers know their rights when it comes to these potential “checkout” fees.

Retailers, for instance, must provide “clear disclosure” of any fees they are charging at the store’s entrance and point of sale or, for online merchants, on their Web site. The fee must also appear on the receipt. Merchants aren’t allowed to take advantage of customers, and the fee can’t be greater than what the store actually pays to accept credit cards.

It seems doubtful that such fees will become widespread, at least not right away. The cost of credit card “swipe” fees is already baked into the price of a store’s merchandise. And merchants may be reluctant to risk losing a sale, if a customer is annoyed at having to pay more when choosing to pay with credit.

It may be that retailers can use the possibility of charging such fees as a negotiating tool over the size of the swipe fees the stores pay, said Trish Wexler, a spokeswoman with the Electronic Payments Coalition, which represents banks and card-payment networks and which worked with Consumer Action on its pamphlet.

The settlement, while controversial, was announced this summer and received preliminary approval in federal court in Brooklyn on Nov. 27. (It applies to purchases made with credit cards, not debit cards.)

What would you do, if you encountered a store that charged you a fee for using a credit card?

Article source: http://bucks.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/27/new-card-fees-possible-but-unlikely/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Former Stanford Executive Gets Prison Term

Laura Pendergest-Holt, 39, had pleaded guilty in June to one count of obstruction of justice, after originally facing 21 counts including fraud and conspiracy.

The sentence was part of a plea agreement, and was imposed by U.S. District Judge David Hittner in Houston.

Pendergest-Holt had been chief investment officer at Stanford Financial Group, where prosecutors said Allen Stanford ran a two-decade fraud centered on bogus certificates of deposits from his Antigua-based Stanford International Bank.

In her plea, Pendergest-Holt admitted to concealing details about the bank’s investments that she knew the SEC wanted.

Prosecutors said she did this to impede the regulator’s probe and keep Stanford’s bank in operation.

Hittner also sentenced Pendergest-Holt to three years of supervised release. The defendant was not fined, but was taken into immediate custody following Thursday’s hearing.

Before Stanford’s fraud was uncovered in 2009, Pendergest-Holt had had a love affair with James Davis, Stanford’s former chief financial officer and the government’s main witness in the case against the former billionaire.

“She feels terrible about ever getting involved with Robert Allen Stanford and Jim Davis and that people were ever defrauded by them,” Chris Flood, a lawyer for Pendergest-Holt, said in a phone interview. “She lost everything herself in the CD program, and was a victim.”

Stanford is serving a 110-year prison sentence following his conviction in March on 13 criminal counts.

Jury selection is scheduled to begin on September 28 for a criminal trial of two former Stanford accounting executives, Mark Kuhrt and Gilberto Lopez.

The case is U.S. v. Stanford et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas, No. 09-cr-00342.

(Reporting By Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2012/09/13/business/13reuters-stanford-pendergestholt-sentencing.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Bits Blog: Apple Rejects App Tracking Drone Strikes

This month, the British newspaper The Guardian ran an interactive map of American drone strikes, pinpointing the locations in Pakistan where missiles from the unmanned aerial vehicles struck suspected terrorists. The map, which was based on data from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism in Britain, was available through The Guardian’s app for the iPhone, as well as its Web site.

A graduate student at New York University, Josh Begley, recently took the same data on drone strikes from the same source that The Guardian used and put it into an iPhone app of his own creation that featured an interactive map. While The Guardian’s map was part of a much broader newspaper app featuring all manner of stories, the app by Mr. Begley, called Drone+, was dedicated exclusively to the drone strikes.

On Monday evening, Apple rejected Mr. Begley’s software from its App Store because, the company said, it ran afoul of Apple standards on objectionable content within apps.

How does that compute?

Information about drone strikes was used both in an article in the Guardian's app, left, and in an app created by a graduate student at New York University.Information about drone strikes was used both in an article in the Guardian’s app, left, and in an app created by a graduate student at New York University.

Mr. Begley appears to be the latest developer to fall down the rabbit hole of Apple policies that determine what can and cannot be distributed through the App Store for iPhones and iPads. Most of the time, Apple’s system for approving apps seems to work pretty smoothly, considering the huge volume of apps the company has to deal with. But when it goes awry, it can lead to some real head scratching.

In a phone interview, Mr. Begley said Drone+ had been rejected twice before by Apple’s App Store team for violations of its policies, first because the app was “not useful or entertaining enough,” according to a copy of his e-mail correspondence with Apple supplied by Mr. Begley. The developer added some features, including the ability to push alerts to users of the app whenever a new drone strike was reported. Apple later had another objection related to the placement of Google’s logo on the map within the app.

It wasn’t until this week that Apple notified Mr. Begley that Drone+ had again been rejected, this time for violating provision 16.1 of its App Store guidelines, which bans software that presents “excessively objectionable or crude content.” Drone+ did not contain any graphic images showing the aftermath of drone strikes, Mr. Begley said. It merely presented their locations on a map.

“I wanted to have a more granular sense of what drone strikes really did look like out of genuine curiosity,” Mr. Begley said, describing his motivations for creating the app.

Tom Neumayr, an Apple spokesman, confirmed that Drone+ had been rejected for violating Apple’s policy on objectionable content, but he declined to comment further on the decision. Wired News first reported news of Mr. Begley’s saga on  Thursday.

Apple caused a stir in 2010 over its decision to reject an app featuring a satirical political cartoon because of a policy against ridiculing public figures. Apple later accepted the app. The incident created concerns about Apple’s gatekeeper role as more media is distributed through its smartphones and tablet devices.

The case of Drone+ is especially puzzling, though, because the material Apple deemed objectionable from Mr. Begley was nearly identical to the material available through The Guardian’s iPhone app. It’s unclear whether Apple is treating the two parties differently because The Guardian is a well-known media organization and Mr. Begley is not, or whether the problem is that Mr. Begley chose to focus his app only on drone strikes.

Article source: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/30/apple-rejects-app-tracking-drone-strikes/?partner=rss&emc=rss

The Media Equation: Hollywood Techniques at Play in Politics

While watching it, I half-expected to see Michael Moore, the creator of “Roger and Me” and “Bowling for Columbine,” walk onto the screen to hammer the point home.

Mr. Moore half-expected it himself, even if the film was paid for by supporters of Newt Gingrich.

“I wondered who they stole from my crew,” Mr. Moore said in a phone interview. “It was fun to hear what I have been saying for 20 years, not just by any Republican candidate, but Newt Gingrich.”

Politics has looked to Hollywood before for inspiration — take, for example, the Capra-like film tribute to Ronald Reagan for the 1984 Republican convention or “The Man From Hope,” the triumph-of-the-human-spirit fable created for Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign by the television producer Harry Thomason.

“When Mitt Romney Came to Town” borrows from a different script — the documentary exposé. The film uses real people talking directly to the camera, varying film stocks and camera angles and cutaways of lonely factories surrounded by weedy parking lots to not only question Mr. Romney’s ability to create jobs but indict him as someone who has been pretty good at destroying them. Think of Willie Horton recast as a venture capitalist and you get a pretty good idea of the flavor of “When Mitt Romney Came to Town.”

Through journalistic documentaries from directors like Alex Gibney and the more politically driven work of Mr. Moore, the public has learned to believe that when they watch a documentary, they will find out the story behind the story. “When Mitt Romney Came to Town” has that ripped-from-the-headlines feel, with Hollywood techniques knit to a scabrous script.

So it only seemed fair to ask Hollywood types what they thought of the film.

“Those in power will appropriate the counterculture to their own ends,” said Mr. Moore, who, like other filmmakers I talked to, seemed taken aback by just how far this particular appropriation goes.

“The people in the film are real and you can tell they are speaking in unscripted ways,” he said. “And what they say is what people in my films say, which is that the rich are getting richer, the middle class is being eliminated and greed rules. This is not just the language of my films, but the language of Occupy Wall Street.” (Simon Dumenco of Advertising Age called the film “the documentary that Occupy Wall Street never got around to making.”)

Unlike some of the documentaries it mimics, “When Mitt Romney Came to Town” has an explicitly partisan and very specific goal: stopping Mr. Romney’s ascent to the nomination. The film was made by the Republican operative Barry Bennett, and was quickly sliced into Hollywood-style trailers and posted online. Financed by a donation from the casino tycoon Sheldon Adelson, the pro-Gingrich super PAC Winning Our Future bought the movie and purchased time on television to broadcast it in South Carolina.

Mr. Gibney, the filmmaker behind documentaries like “Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room” and “Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer,” got right to the point when I called him.

“O.K., I admit it. I made the documentary. They paid me $10 million. I figured it would be seen as a seamless part of the rest of my work,” he said. Jokes aside, he is concerned that the line between hard-hitting point-of-view documentaries and paid agitprop could become a fuzzy one.

“It worries me because it pollutes the form,” he said. “People could marginalize something that I made by saying that it’s no different than some other piece of paid propaganda that is out there.”

Judd Apatow, the director/producer behind “Superbad,” “Knocked Up” and “Bridesmaids,” said he initially saw the documentary as of a piece with films like Mr. Moore’s “Roger and Me.” “But after a while, it becomes so over the top that it seems more like a sketch on ‘The Daily Show,’ ” he said.

“I think they tapped into something that a lot of people think about, though,” Mr. Apatow added. “There are plenty of people who believe that companies will try to be profitable no matter what the human costs.”

E-mail: carr@nytimes.com;

Twitter.com/carr2n

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=2c4f71491b04623efe67f139e924ab6a

Postal Service Cuts Will Slow First-Class Mail

The United States Postal Service said it planned to largely eliminate next-day delivery for first-class mail as part of its push to cut costs and reduce its budget deficit. Currently, more than 40 percent of first-class mail is delivered in one day.

The agency said the slower delivery would result from its decision to shut about half of its 487 mail processing centers nationwide. The move is expected to eliminate about 28,000 jobs and increase the distance that mail must travel between post offices and processing centers. It would be the first reduction in delivery standards for first-class mail in 40 years.

Current standards call for delivering first-class mail in one to three days within the continental United States. Under the planned cutbacks, those delivery times would increase to two or three days, potentially creating problems for clients of Netflix, the popular DVD-by-mail service, who hope that their next episodes of “Mad Men” will arrive in a day, or procrastinators who like to pay bills as late as possible.

The agency had announced on Sept. 15 that it would begin studying plans to close 252 of its mail processing centers.

On Monday, the Postal Service said it would “move forward” with that plan, with closings to begin as early as March. It also said it was seeking a nonbinding advisory opinion from the Postal Regulatory Commission about the closures, although agency officials said they were intent on closing the processing centers as part of a plan to save $3 billion a year by 2015.

“The bottom line is that in the last three years, we’ve lost almost 27 percent of our first-class volume,” Patrick Donahoe, the postmaster general, said in a phone interview. “In 2000, 5 percent of people paid bills online. Now it’s 60 percent. The problem is we’ve lost so much volume in blue-box mail, we can’t hold out for next-day service anymore.”

The Postal Service lost $5.1 billion last year.

Mr. Donahoe has said that by 2015, he hopes to cut $20 billion from the agency’s annual costs, now about $75 billion. He has called for closing up to 3,700 of the nation’s 32,000 post offices, reducing deliveries to five days a week from six and cutting the agency’s work force of 653,000 employees by more than 100,000.

Postal officials said they would not make definitive announcements on any post office closings before January.

But many of the other proposed changes sought by the agency would require Congressional action.

So far, lawmakers have been unwilling to grant Mr. Donahoe’s requests or agree on an alternative plan of action.

“What I need Congress to do is act now to help me on the things they can help me on,” Mr. Donahoe said.

In particular, he urged Congress to approve five-day-a-week delivery and to remove the post office’s obligation to set aside about $5.5 billion a year for 10 years to prefund retiree health care, a burden that has accounted for a large share of the agency’s financial losses in recent years. If Congress takes those two actions, “it can help me save $8.5 billion a year,” he said.

The Postal Service had previously announced a 1-cent increase in first-class postage, to 45 cents, starting Jan. 22.

Fredric Rolando, president of the National Association of Letter Carriers, voiced concern about the proposal to reduce delivery standards.

“High-quality service is essential to preserving the value of our networks and to any future growth strategy,” Mr. Rolando said in a statement. “Degrading standards not only hurts the public and the businesses we serve, it’s also counterproductive for the Postal Service because it will drive more people away from using the mail.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=2b05b39eeecafd1a428a66913541d928

Irate News Corp. Shareholders to Take Murdoch to the Woodshed

In a 12-minute exchange last year, one disapproving shareholder gave Rupert Murdoch, the company’s chairman and chief executive, a copy of “Man Bites Murdoch,” an autobiographical book about an editor’s clashes with the media giant, and asked if he would be attending the comedian Jon Stewart’s “Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear” in Washington. Mr. Murdoch said he would be in Australia.

But that incident might seem tame once this year’s meeting ends Friday afternoon in Los Angeles. The gathering is expected to be the company’s most contentious in years, with frustrated shareholders taking the microphone to demand accountability after a phone-hacking scandal in Britain that has embarrassed the company.

Investors will also have the chance to vote on the company’s board members, including Mr. Murdoch and his sons, James and Lachlan. While the family’s 40 percent stake virtually guarantees they will be re-elected, the chorus of discontent has put the company in an uncustomary defensive position.

The most forceful, and potentially most ominous protest is likely to come from Tom Watson, the British Labour Party legislator who has led the investigation into phone-hacking at News Corporation’s British newspaper unit. Mr. Watson, who acquired nonvoting proxy shareholder status to attend the meeting, said he planned to accuse the company of engaging in further criminal wrongdoing involving surveillance techniques that extend beyond the phone hacking. He did not discuss potential evidence.

“A lot of institutional investors do not know the scope nor the implications of what’s happening in the U.K.,” Mr. Watson said in a phone interview. “You can delegate power but not responsibility, and Rupert Murdoch for whatever reason has failed to put in corporate governance arrangements that prohibit crimes from being committed.”

A News Corporation spokeswoman, Teri Everett, declined to comment.

The company has done its part to carefully orchestrate the gathering. For the first time, News Corporation, citing security concerns, has made attendees register and R.S.V.P. before the event. Rather than holding the meeting at its usual venue, the Hudson Theater in New York, it will take place at the 476-seat Darryl F. Zanuck Theater on the gilded Art Deco-style Fox Studios lot near Beverly Hills, Calif.

News Corporation said attendance would be similar to previous years and that it was not uncommon for companies to change locations for annual meetings. The Los Angeles venue was chosen because the company’s entertainment division, which makes shows like “Modern Family” and movies like “Avatar,” is a major contributor to its financial growth, News Corporation said.

Some shareholders will get up to 15 minutes to speak directly to Mr. Murdoch, according to people who have attended previous meetings. “That can be a pretty long 15 minutes,” said Digby Gilmour, head of telecommunications and media research at C.L.S.A. Australia.

Stephen Mayne, a director at the Australian Shareholders’ Association, and the person who presented Mr. Murdoch with the book last year, said he planned to travel from Sydney to attend. A former News Corporation employee and longtime shareholder, Mr. Mayne has attended 12 annual meetings.

Mr. Murdoch has in recent years grown increasingly impatient with shareholder speeches, Mr. Mayne said. “I got 40 minutes of back and forth in 1999,” he said, adding: “But he’s gotten a lot tougher as he’s gotten older.”

Mr. Mayne’s advice for shareholders standing up to confront Mr. Murdoch? “He’ll shut you down. You’ve got to be quick and polite but firm at the same time.”

Any dissent will largely be symbolic. Mr. Murdoch owns nearly 40 percent of voting shares, and 7 percent belong to Prince Walid bin Talal of Saudi Arabia, who has expressed his support for the board. As many as 30 percent of shareholders are expected to cast votes against Murdoch family members, several analysts estimated. Shareholder activists will dominate the meeting, since large institutional investors do not typically air grievances in such a public forum, analysts said. “There will be a lot of noise, but at the end, not a lot of change,” Mr. Gilmour said.

The meetings typically begin with Mr. Murdoch opening the floor to questions, Mr. Mayne said. At the end of the exchanges, he gives a state-of-the-company address. That talk could become a more prominent part of the presentation as Mr. Murdoch lays out the shareholder-friendly actions News Corporation has recently taken, said a Deutsche Bank Securities analyst, Doug Mitchelson.

One of them is a $5 billion stock buyback program currently under way, which has countered some investors’ concerns about News Corporation’s decision in July to withdraw its $12 billion bid for the British Sky Broadcasting Group. Chase Carey, chief operating officer, has said he would pursue additional stock buybacks on top of the $5 billion program. “As much as we thought Sky was a good deal, buying back stock is a better deal,” said Michael Nathanson, an analyst at Nomura Securities.

Company executives are sure to point out on Friday that even as most media companies struggle, News Corporation shares are up about 14 percent with a 52-week high of $18.35. The stock closed at $17.05 on Thursday.

Last year, before the revelations of widespread phone-hacking, Mr. Mayne questioned Mr. Murdoch about allegations of hacking in 2006 involving two News of the World journalists, Clive Goodman and Andy Coulson.

“There has been two parliamentary inquiries, which have found no further evidence or any other thing at all,” Mr. Murdoch responded, according to a transcript. “If anything was to come to light, we challenge people to give us evidence, and no one has been able to do so.”

In the end, the meeting will most likely give a platform to critics of the company’s corporate governance and not be a referendum on its financial performance.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=32191ec3d59166cb67612ab694de2329