|
|
|
|
|
|
by Alex_MJ
4363 days ago
|
|
|
TIL Comcast isn't in it for the public interest. I'm not missing that at all. The fact that we expect corporations to further their own interests over those of the public (and that people who are cunning enough to get into powerful government positions often come from industry) is exactly why the law is lettered that way in the first place. If you think you get to a position anywhere close to where these guys are by being a jeopardizing valuable relationships in the name of doing-things-in-the-spirit-of-selfless-public-service, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn I'm looking to sell. Good price, too, shoot me a PM. |
|
|
You're also missing that the executives personal interest dont per-se align with those of their parent. So its quite possible for an individual to undermine both the public and his employer with a single go.
Various rogue executives illustrate this point without much recourse to google. But say nick leeson at baring kind of jumps out, and then the scale of what was seen in the past 5-7 years makes that look like childs play.
You might also find this "of intellectual interest"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7538921
...Or, not.
But the issues are far deeper--extending for many years and at many levels--more than just a single example taken out of context.
________
Edit: item?id={7538921}