Morgenson on ranting

I'm no longer regularly covering, or even regularly reading, Gretchen Morgenson. But sometimes she catches my eye with something that leaves me breathless, even after detailing the errors and excesses in her Sunday Screeds for eight months.

Today, reporting on a speech by Marty Lipton of poison pill fame, whom Gretchen labels an "apologist for embattled chief executives," Gretchen says:

the sheer desperation in Mr. Lipton’s speech, called “Shareholder Activism and the Eclipse of the Public Corporation,” subverted the more intellectually challenging elements of his argument, leaving what remained something of a rant.

"Rant"?! What does Gretchen think she does week after week  - engage in "intellectually challenging" arguments?  My Morgenson archive has dozens of examples of Morgenson's simplistic attacks and disingenuous evasions. Lipton, at least, is an effective advocate for his big corporate clients, or more precisely their managers. We know where Lipton is coming from.  Gretchen's role in these debates is a good deal murkier.

Comments

[save_the_rustbelt]

Yes, we know his "shareholders be damned" approach very well.

That is how we get decades of bad management without board interference. Think GM and Ford.

[M. Hodak]

It's also how we got the rest of America.

Your moniker "save-the-rustbelt" suggests a distinct, whiny detachment from the America I know, one whose "rustbelt" would be the preferred destination of 90% of the non-US world--if the unions would dare let them in.