As DuPont Earns, News Journal Spurns Delaware Workers
My, when did The News Journal turn into a publicity arm of DuPont?
In today’s issue, The News Journal reports prints a press release on the increase in profits in the 3rd Quarter for DuPont with such hyperboles as “aggressive cost-cutting”, “aggressively moved to cut overhead” and “a more streamlined organization”. No mention of the thousands of people who lost their jobs at DuPont this year from the aggressive cost-cutting.
Tags: DuPont, The News Journal
Please. Not job cuts. “Negative employment growth” sounds nicer.
DuPont’s rebounded back to last November’s price. Way to go, Ellen.
Wonder if the NJ will spend any time speaking to the Delawareans who lost their jobs at Dupont — you know, for the balance. Because I’m sure Belinsky will be here making the case that they got what they deserved.
Not at all, Cassandra. Did any Delawareans lose their jobs? I didn’t see if this were the case. If there were layoffs elsewhere, they would be regrettable, but only a healthy company can proceed to hire engineers, drivers, sales reps, chemists and shipping clerks.
If DuPont had continued to founder, it would be poised to follow Rohm, Hercules and Basell into the ashcan of history. Not a good outcome for Delaware or its people.
Where were you last year? Plenty of Duponters right here in Delaware lost their jobs — I don’t have the number to hand (someone here will) but there were jobs lost.
Belinksy, my post is more about the lameness of the NJ’s reporting than Dupont.
bad bews for Seaford:
Beijing Goes After U.S.-Made Nylon
NY Times ^ | 10/20/09 | ANDREW JACOBS
BEIJING — Toothbrushes and nylon socks have become the latest projectiles in the continuing trade skirmish between the China and the United States. The Chinese Ministry of Commerce issued a preliminary ruling Monday that imposed a 36 percent tariff on American-made Nylon 6, a synthetic filament that ends up in a wide array of products, including toothbrushes, auto parts, socks and the handles of Glock handguns. Nylon 6 from Taiwan and Russia would also be taxed, but at much lower rates.
First the tax on chicken feet, now this? Poor Seaford.
In response to CM’s invitation, I’ve tried to learn the extent to which DuPont’s layoffs of last winter affected its Delaware workforce. Thus far, no success. I read of furloughs among management, but the rank-and-file cuts seem to be elsewhere. I retain an open mind.
I also question the gist of this thread. DuPont is one of the few large American companies that invents, produces, developes, adds value – rather than trading mortgages and flipping securities. If they’re turning things around, I take this as a sign that modest headway is being made against the continuing economic blizzard.
News-Journal not to be faulted on this story.
News-Journal not to be faulted on this story.
To use corporate double-speak that Belinksy is so fond of — You have managed a conclusion that is least-best.
Nemski: Maybe you’re longing for a Ryan Cormier feature on guys who got downsized last year [in Ohio?], but I’d rather see news in the shrunken news hole. I’d like to see some coverage of school board meetings, the zoning commission, DNREC, the Insurance Commissioner. Stuff that takes work.
they love employees but hate employers.
Belinsky: What the NJ printed is a press release, complete with the biased adverbs (“aggressively”? Isn’t that a judgment call?) that the Du Pont flack put in there. That’s the point of the post.
Few will claim that DuPont didn’t “aggressively” cut its costs over the last 12 months.
“Aggressive cost cutting” is boardroom-speak. Failing to translate the euphemisms is just lazy journalism.
It’s considered writing tight. They closed plants, laid off employees, closed plants, shed contractors, had management take unpaid leave, among many other things. It’s not “lazy journalism.”
[The actual press read, “Companywide fixed cost reduction and productivity actions boosted third quarter pre-tax earnings by about $300 million brought year-to-date program cost reductions to $900 million versus the company’s full-year goal of $1 billion”.]
Notably, DuPont credited the Stimulus bill for an uptick several months ago. It also recently increased its investment in solar panel production.
<i.It’s considered writing tight.
They’re drinking?
They closed plants, laid off employees, closed plants, shed contractors, had management take unpaid leave, among many other things.
See, was it so hard to write that?
Yes, it’s boardroom speak — as in spin. If you’re going to use the word “aggressively,” it should be attributed to the company’s spin artists. If you want facts to support that, tell me what percentage of spending $1 billion represents.
As for “writing tight,” the sentence reads the same with the adverb cut out. If I were editing it for space, that word might save me a line, and out it would go.
With all respect, Geezer, that DuPont “aggressively” cut costs over that past 15 months is obvious to the point of received wisdom.
Some linguists and editors dislike adverbs in general. I still think they have their place.
“Brutally” would be just as effective and accurate an adverb as “aggressively.” Yes, adverbs have their place — mostly in propaganda. And since one came directly from a piece of company progaganda, how hard would it be to attribute the word to the spokescritter? Not hard at all.
I would understand your point except that “aggressively” did not appear in the press release.
“Brutally,” a judgmental term, would belong in opinion or analysis.