Procter & Gamble placed nearly identical op-eds pushing for corporate tax cuts
Source: Media Matters
Procter & Gamble has been placing virtually identical op-eds supposedly written by different authors arguing for corporate tax cuts in newspapers across the country. In comments to Media Matters, some of the editors of those newspapers criticized the company for their tactics, with one saying the company would be blacklisted from the paper.
In recent weeks, the company has been helping place op-eds by manufacturing plant managers across the country in their respective newspapers that tout the alleged benefits of cutting corporate taxes to the economy (numerous economists disagree). While those op-eds all have different authors, they are virtually the same except for a few sentences about the P&G plant in the area. The North Carolina-based website Greensboro 101 first noted the similarities in a December 11 post. (Thanks to reader R.K. for passing on the information.)
Those op-eds are:
A November 24 op-ed in the Green Bay Press-Gazette (WI) by Green Bay plant manager Dan Lloyd. (Update: The publication has since added an editor's note to the top of the piece.)
A November 25 op-ed in The Salt Lake Tribune (UT) by Box Elder manager Joe Tomon.
A December 5 op-ed in the Southeast Missourian by Cape Girardeau plant managers Jack Geissinger and Tim Hayner.
A December 6 op-ed in The Times-Tribune (Scranton, PA) by Mehoopany plant managers Laszlo Varga and Jose Manuel Sanchez.
A December 10 op-ed in the News & Record by (Greensboro, NC) Greensboro plant managers Kevin Hazel and John Sorjonen. (The paper has since added an editors note.)
P&G defended the op-eds in the following statement to Media Matters (the statement also appeared in the News & Record):
"When P&G decided to promote the benefits of corporate tax reform, we encouraged most of our U.S. plant managers to write Op-Eds or Letters to the Editor for their local newspapers. Many accepted. Working as a team, a format was devised that was consistent and accurate. The fact that many of our plant managers, from all over the country, agreed on the content further demonstrates that corporate tax reform is a necessity to keep U.S. companies competitive in the global market. This topic impacts every P&G business and manufacturing site, and we appreciate the leadership of our plant managers."
Read more: Link tohttps://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/12/13/procter-gamble-placed-nearly-identical-op-eds-pushing-corporate-tax-cuts-different-authors-numerous/218832 source
What is it going to take for the majority of Americans to get off their asses and start shutting companies like this down with boycotts and protests?
Why is there a single "right-wing" local radio station in a "blue" city that doesn't have 10,000 people marching in front of their doors?
They (the 0.000001%) have declared WAR on us. It's way past time to fight the hell back!
AllaN01Bear
(18,261 posts)rurallib
(62,423 posts)Do you believe meadiamatters is "bull" for reporting this or P&G is "bull" for doing this?
aggiesal
(8,918 posts)in an op-ed letter to your local paper, that we'll write for you, or you'll be fired.
maxrandb
(15,334 posts)One of the plant managers saying; hey I really don't agree with the corporate tax cut?
dalton99a
(81,516 posts)ProfessorGAC
(65,076 posts)A plant manager is not some high fallutin' zillion dollar a year job. A very good gig? Yes. But responsibility over a 24/7 operation can also big one giant pain in the rear.
I can see some plant managers believing that it isn't really something they care about or wish to stand behind.
That said, they have LOTS of sites in the US. The managers who did believe in it could be those that put their name on it. While an equal or greater number decided they didn't want to be part of it.
Notice that for all their locations, there isn't a op-ed referenced for each... It was a half dozen out of more than 30.
Kimchijeon
(1,606 posts)Was probably strongly 'encouraged ' I am guessing
truthisfreedom
(23,148 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Besides which, tax cuts have MINIMAL, if any, effect on the economy. It helps the corporation's bottom line, but they don't pour that money back into the company. They invest and hoard it, give out officer bonuses, and the like.
aggiesal
(8,918 posts)We will go into a recession within 6 months of the tax cuts taking effect.
You heard it here 1st.
Well, maybe 2nd or 3rd even.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)I think it took several years. Time for the fraud to kick in and be realized.
How people can still fall for this stuff, after we've been through this more than once.
aggiesal
(8,918 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)The economy was already in deep trouble. That's why Reagan was elected by a landslide.
There were 2 tax cut bills. We were IN some sort of kerfuffle in the economy....runamok interest rates, double digit inflation, real estate affected, car sales affected, unemployment, gas shortages...soon after Reagan took office.
I think the Reagan tax cuts added to the problem, by adding to the deficit, but it didn't cause the economic problems.
Not sure about the 2nd tax cut bill. I don't think there was another recession that soon after the first.
(Recession 1980 recession JanJuly 1980 lasted 6 months)
(Recession 19811982 recession July 1981 Nov 1982 Lasted 1 year 4 months)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States#Great_Depression_onward
SECOND REAGAN TAX CUTS: Tax Reform Act of 1986
Next recession: Early 1990s recession in the United States July 1990 Mar 1991 Lasted 8 months
We then had the Clinton Years:
We don't have another recession until another Republican takes office: George W. Bush.