Apple and the options backdating scandal of the past decade Chathurika peiris naude

The board decided to say nothing, after seeking advice on its obligations from two outside lawyers, who agreed it could remain silent.In the end, Jobs had the surgery, on Saturday, July 31, 2004, at Stanford University Medical Center in Palo Alto, near his home.

During a routine abdominal scan, doctors had discovered a tumor growing in his pancreas.This was obviously a beneficial thing for us over the years, but much terrific content and solid news were typically the result. (So is Facebook’s Elliot Schrage.) Did she sometimes ice our reporters out, ignore calls or reply with newsless answers? (Please meet Yahoo PR for much of my time covering it over the last two decades, especially under the current administration, which has not returned of my calls in years.) Did she try her hardest to showcase Apple and its products in a way that benefited it? As she once told me when we talked about her outsize reputation in the tech press: “I am not here to make friends with reporters, I am here to put a light on and sell Apple products.” It was no surprise that some used the opportunity of her exit to drag out their complaints in the kind of strange rage that has been — at least to my mind — oddly emotional and sometimes full of vitriol that would never be directed at a man who was similarly strong.Still, despite what many of her detractors have written since the news of her departure came, I was never “scared” of her, any more than I fear any of the other hard-charging PR and communications execs I have encountered over the many years I have covered tech. Consider the various words used to describe her: “Queen of Evil,” “wicked witch,” “cold and distant,” “frigid supremacy,” “queen bee” and, perhaps most obviously misogynistic, “dominatrix.” One time, horror of horrors, she hung up in anger on one reporter, who later took to the comments section of one recent story about her Apple departure and used astonishingly inappropriate words to describe anyone with whom she got along.I only dwell on this because it’s both sad and disturbing that it’s still okay to talk about a high-ranking woman in this way and make it seem as if it was a cogent and valid commentary on her performance as a professional executive.Recently, the same has been true around the firing of New York Times editor Jill Abramson, who was called “pushy” and “brusque.” Get in line on this one — I can’t tell you how often I get called such things and much worse.

Leave a Reply