Drama at GE Shareholders Meeting, page 1

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times

Topic started on 22-4-2009 @ 07:08 PM by centurion1211

It turns out that many at the recent GE shareholders meeting were most upset about the left-leaning tilt of GE's subsidiary MSNBC. Person after person went to the microphone during the Q&A period to complain about Keith Olbermann and others. Several questioners had their microphones cut off in an apparent attempt to silence the dissent.

article

Things got testy Wednesday at the GE shareholders meeting courtesy of several complaints about political bias at its media division, NBC Universal.

Just don't expect to see the fireworks at the company's webcast of the event, which contains prepared remarks from CEO Jeff Immelt and CFO Keith Sherin but leaves out their interaction with shareholders.

A GE spokesman clarified that the corporation doesn't typically broadcast the shareholders meeting in its entirety.

Just before GE board members were re-elected, shareholders asked about 10 questions of a mostly political nature concerning the viewpoints of MSNBC and CNBC, according to attendees.

First up was a woman asking about a reported meeting in which Immelt and NBC Uni CEO Jeff Zucker supposedly told top CNBC executives and talent to be less critical of President Obama and his policies.

I'm happy to see that people are also standing up at shareholder's meetings to go along with the Tea Bag events to let companies and the government know of our displeasure with their fiscal and political activities.

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 07:30 PM by daddyroo45

Does anyome really think that the board of directors of G.E. care what the share holders think? You would have to have a controlling interest of stock to get your point across to them. I don't look for any drastic changes in MSNBC programing,or insight.

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 07:33 PM by justsomeboreddude

Glad to hear that somebody who owns part of GE see's what a biased piece of crap Mr. Olberman is.

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 07:44 PM by Frogs

Well, MSNBC has been getting beaten pretty badly in the ratings as of late. My hat's off the shareholders that attended for expressing their rights as shareholders to express their views at the meeting.

However, if anything makes them change it will likely be low ratings.

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 08:20 PM by neo67

i am glad these people stood up and voiced their concerns.

msnbc is a joint venture between microsoft and nbc. and yes ge owns nbc.

its sad to say this is an isolated incident and much wont be made out of it.

more people need to start yelling at microsoft as well as ge to be taken seriously.

you think ge is powerful take a good look at ms. ie bill gates

[edit on 22-4-2009 by neo67]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 09:09 PM by Ferris.Bueller.II

I'm surprised there wasn't a vote of 'No Confidence' with Immelt being in Obama's pocket politically, thereby negating any chance of being nonbiased for any of the NBC networks and their news organizations.

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 09:46 PM by justsomeboreddude

reply to post by neo67

I would just like to point out that Microsoft pulled out of MSNBC in December of 2005. They do however own 50% of the MSNBC website.

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 10:01 PM by neo67

Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
reply to post by neo67

I would just like to point out that Microsoft pulled out of MSNBC in December of 2005. They do however own 50% of the MSNBC website.

are you totally sure aabout that? i admit the material i looked at was probably dated.

lookin at wikipedia right now and i see this.

Two partnerships with the name MSNBC were founded in 1996 by Microsoft and General Electric's NBC unit, which is now NBC Universal. Although Microsoft and NBC shared operations of MSNBC cable at its founding, it was announced on December 23, 2005, that NBC Universal would purchase a majority stake in the television network, which left Microsoft with 18%. The two companies remain 50-50 partners in msnbc.com. MSNBC shares the NBC logo of a rainbow peacock with its sister channels NBC and CNBC. Microsoft invested $220 million for a 50% share of the cable network, while MSNBC and Microsoft would share the cost of a $200 million newsroom in Redmond, Washington for msnbc.com. NBC supplied the space with an 18 month old America's Talking network.

On December 23, 2005, it was announced that NBC Universal would acquire an additional 32% share of the television network from Microsoft, solidifying its control over television operations and allowing NBC to further consolidate MSNBC's backroom operations with NBC News and its other cable properties. Msnbc.com would continue to be 50% owned by both NBC and Microsoft, and its operations would be largely unaffected. NBC would have the option to buy the remaining 18% share from Microsoft after two years. Rumors circulated that the cable network would eventually be rebranded as NBC News Channel, a name currently used for the network's news service to NBC affiliates.

according to wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org...

yeah man pretty much all nbc now glad you corrected.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by neo67]

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 10:05 PM by slipkid

Wasn't it announced at the same meeting that GE received 2 Billion Dollars in Stimulus money to build windmills.

Apparently it does pay to do what MSLBGT does.

reply posted on 22-4-2009 @ 10:21 PM by neo67

it just hit me i hear alot of how bad the new york times and msnbc are in dire straits financially .

i think rupert murdoch should just buy both of them man that would piss off the left something pretty fierce and i am all for anything that pisses of the left.

reply posted on 23-4-2009 @ 07:51 AM by Blanca Rose

reply to post by centurion1211

Well, if these people are really upset, then they should get rid of their shares in this company to prove a point.

By standing up and just talking about it, is a waste of time.

Hurt these companies by action, not with words!

reply posted on 23-4-2009 @ 08:34 AM by jtma508

I agree with Blanca. If they don't like what GE is doing then why not just sell their shares and buy Fox? Form what was posted here Fox seems to be a much better fit. But to keep things in perspective:

As of Dec. 31, 2007, there were 9,987.6 million shares of GE common stock outstanding.

So how representative are the opinions of this handful of dissenters? Statistically meaningless.

reply posted on 23-4-2009 @ 08:41 AM by centurion1211

reply to post by jtma508

Blanca and jtma508,

Still, doing something - even if it is a "statistically" small step - is far better than sitting back and doing nothing. Do you know for a fact that these people didn't sell their shares after the meeting?

Everything starts with an idea that someone stands up and starts into motion. It gets bigger if other people also pick up the mantle.

Your comment seems to suggest the attitude of, "Gee, this looks difficult. I'd better just return to the couch."

That's pretty much a working definition of "sheeple".