Law And More

Controversy - Former Googler Patrick Shyu Goes for Broke (and how social networks have made mean-spirited cool)

The promotional power of controversy is well-known. But, what is also a pragmatic reality is that it is a marketing/public relations tool which has to be carefully managed.

Recently, as Insider reports, former Googler Patrick Shyu has, well, gone for broke in leveraging his use of controversy to get, retain, and grow subscribers for his YouTube Tech Lead Show.

On Twitter, in posts which he had since deleted, he gushed about how he used to tell females interviewing for coding positions at Google to go home and have babies. Yes, he contends to have actually said that, in real time. In addition, he had tweeted, also since deleted, why women shouldn't code. 

Here is Shyu's LinkedIn site, on which he has 61,285 followers.

Whether there will be an escalation of subscribers to his subscription service or a flight out - only time will tell. In the current ethos of mean-spirited everything many might be attracted to Shyi's world view and his crass way of putting it out there. Social networks have elevated what is mean-spirited to the new cool. 

When toxic Gawker collapsed my kind cheered. We hoped that was the end of that. However, it taught well other promoters how to push the envelope on mean to succeed. 

Connect with Editor-in-Chief Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com. 

Trump's Power - Everyone Is Measuring It

"President Trump and the MAGA movement are showing signs of moving in different directions. By no stretch of the imagination is Trump’s base deserting him. But nor are those voters willing to simply do his bidding." - Niall Stanage, The Hill, May 23, 2022

The focus has long shifted from the real or alleged perils presented by Donald Trump to how much power does he still have. The answer is two-fold:  (1) He still has more power than his critics anticipated and (2) He is losing the ability to unilaterally control the MAGA movement.

That leaves progressives in an urgent state of coming up with strategies to create their own kinds of power. In that the Democratic Party seems to have defaulted to New York City Mayor Eric Adams. As Politico reported, he is the new messaging machine. 

At the Democratic Congressional Committee he advocated applying his own motto: Get Stuff Done. Yes, take action. He also was bullish on storytelling. Part of that was forcing the GOP to come to terms with their own conflicting stories. Yes, they are for law and order but they back off from adequate funding of law enforcement. 

The buzz is that Adams could put himself out there for US President in 2024. What operates against that is the escalating troubles in his own city. Violence is the dominant ethos. In addition, COVID has returned. Meanwhile, remote work has sent the commercial real estate industry reeling. 

Trump has established almost a mystical force field for his points of view. Traditional politicos don't know how to neutralize it.

Connect with Editor-in-Chief Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

The New York Times - When It Wasn't Winning It Was Almost Human

"Like a burning sun that never sets, the New York Times is forever there, forever reminding us of its presence, and forever neglecting to give adequate recognition to the rays of light emitted by lesser stars." - Jack Shafer, Politico, May 23, 2022

The New York Times was almost human when it wasn't winning. Remember that. Thought leaders were speculating that some foundation would take it over. At the time it wasn't getting the hang of digital and didn't seem really to understand that was a must-do. Meanwhile the rest of us were sweating about page views. Making a living depended on it. That's what we knew. 

That was then.

Now, as Shafer documents, that it's totally back it is again totally unlikable. Although I have paid subscriptions to a growing list of media outlets, I refuse to align myself with The New York Times.

The tone of The Times articles is one of ownership. Not accidentally readers get the feeling that this is the definitive word on topic X or topic Y. Maybe that's the game plan. Like the Roman Catholic Church, The New York Times seems to gaslight us that it is infallible. 

Most annonying, of course: Its long-termers like David Brooks verbalize as if they were sun gods. All the world is supposed to turn to those worlds with adulation. 

Maybe Shafer's observations, along with the growing number of nasty tweets, can break the spell. After all, Roman Catholism continues to lose global market share. At one time it had been one of the most powerful and during brands.

Connect with humber Editor-in-Chief Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

Amber Heard and Other "Imperfect" Victims of Alleged Domestic Abuse - #MeToo In-Play

"#MeToo is over if we don't listen to 'imperfect' [alleged] victims like Amber Heard." - Martha Gill, The Guardian, May 22, 2022.

#MeToo had caught fire. We all know that.

The high-profile females who contended they have been "victims" of sexual misconduct were, well, not imperfect.

As they presented their complaints there was no "evidence" that they might have collaborated in what they alleged had happened to them. In addition, they were what we think of as "solid citizens." No, they didn't have to be Saints. Some who had become caught in the alleged sexual abuse by power brokers in media had been quite ambitious. Society remains ambivalent about that trait in females. 

So much for the victims who met the specs for the acceptable victim.

Then came along Amber Heard. Some fear her streaming presence could make #MeToo go poof. In a 2018 The Washington Post op-ed she contended she had been a survivor of domestic abuse. In that piece she didn't mention her former husband Johnny Depp by name.

Nevertheless, he filed a $50 million defamation lawsuit. The result is one of those Trials of the Century which will wrap this week. It's sucking up so much media oxygen. 

Well, Heard is not a solid citizen type. She is been labeled the "imperfect victim."

For example, she said she would donate all her divorce proceeds to charity. That didn't happen.

There is also a recording of her hitting Depp. 

In addition, the skilled lawyers representing Depp from Brown Rudnick are knocking the stuffing out of her on cross-examination as well as through objections. That's so much the situation the BR lawyer Camille Vasquez, although not a partner but an associate, has become a TikTok star.

However, what Gill and others are pushing back with is this: #MeToo was intended to give voice to imperfect victims. They didn't have to fit the traditional stereotype of the Good Girl. 

However movements are fragile. Remember the late 1960s and early 1970s Counterculture? That too caught fire. The severe recession of the mid 1970s essentially ended that Do Your Own Thing ethos. We got it that we had to do what The Man demanded. Some of us even felt that our Counterculture selves had represented excess. 

#MeToo also could be what a society leaves behind. 

Connect with Editor-in-Chief Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

 

"Depp v Heard" - Not Since OJ Simpson Murder Trial Have Lawyers Been Such Celebrities + Have Down Cold Nuances of Defamation Law

Good luck marketing departments of law firms trying to get attention in the media. The dismissal of litigation the legal team might have obtained is likely not being noticed. Even if the head of the team is a brandname and the law firm is in the top 10. 

The preoccupation has been with the lawyers on both sides in "Depp v Heard." Yes, the focus on the lawyers' performance art has been as over-the-top, just as in the OJ Simpson murder trial. For decades there will be re-runs of that "Depp v Heard" courtroom theatre in thought leadership articles, documentaries, and more. For this version of a trial of a century there are streaming and social networks. 

For Johnny Depp the star players are Brown Rudnick's Benjamin Chew and Camille Vasquez. The latter, although an associate not a partner, has received more than 541.8 million page views on TikTok. As Law and More chronicles, the world has fallen in love with her aggressive objections and cross-examination. Chew, who had been with Big Law's Squire Patton Boggs, has developed a signature for his devotion to gummy bears.

For Amber Heard it's Woods Rogers' Benjamin Rottenborn. Previously with Kirkland & Ellis, Rottenborn has become infamous for screwing up. Insider gleefully notes:

" [Rottenborn] has struggled to win the popularity battle online. Early in the trial, Depp fans seized on an embarrassing slip-up that has since become the defining soundbite of the case: Rottenborn objecting to his own question while grilling Depp."

If juries are more influenced by likability versus evidence, Rottenborn might have done a disservice to this client. 

This trial has been set in play by Heard's 2018 The Washington Post Op-ed on being a survivor of domestic abuse. A warning to those who really don't understand the nuances of defamation law in that op-ed Heard never mentioned Depp by name. Also, it is reported that she did seek legal advice before publishing the personal essay. Yet here we are with the a trial that has sucked up all the oxygen in not only legal but also general media.

Connect with Editor-in-Chief Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

Is Anna Delvey aka Anna Sorokin Having Fun With Us Again?

From the Ice detention center in Goshen, New York Anna Delvey aka Anna Sorokin announced the formation of her law firm, reports New York Magazine. It's called Delvey & Daughters PLLC. It will only accept the retainer payment in Dogecoin. 

Since Delvey has no legal training - except by omosis through her own trial at which she was convicted - she may be having fun with us. Yes, once again, she could be spinning together a fantasy world. 

Those of us in the creative professions understand fully the satisfaction Delvey might derive from creating her own universe. This one which most agree is "reality" can be painful in how boring and predictable it is. Yet, society pushes us to be in that rule-bound  box for our personal lives and what we do to bring in income. 

Perhaps Delvey simply decided she won't go near that box and she will accept the consequences. Also, there is the possibility that she will study for a law degree.

No matter how that might play out, she will continue to fascinate us.

Connect with Editor-in-Chief Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

Options to Chasing Partnership - On Subreddit, 2nd Year Associate Discusses Jump to In-House

Here on the Subreddit BigLaw Thread, a 2nd year corporate associates assesses when to move on from Big Law. Obviously this junior lawyer doesn't have partnership as a goal. 

TIMING 

"I’ve got an offer to move in house with a media company as a junior attorney. Sounds like it would be a cool job doing what I like to do, but am I moving out of big law too soon? I feel like I’m just barely starting to grasp the ins and outs of M&A work and I’m worried I might be missing out on valuable firm experience that I wouldn’t otherwise get, and that my options going forward will be more limited by moving in house now."

One detailed thoughtful comment coming in sums up the situation as this: You already have BigLaw on your resume. You learn a lot during the first two years as an associate. Less so in the next two years as compared to what can be learned in-house. So, the timing is right for a move.

TWO WARNINGS

However, there is a two-part warning. 

1) Do due dilgence on the new opportunity that you will learn enough to be able to market yourself to the next in-house job. In this there is the assumption that the first in-house job represents just a start in that game. However, it is noted that lucrative career paths can be followed by staying with one in-house department.

2) It is unlikely that those departing from private practice will be able to return from in-house. 

Connect with Editor-in-Chief Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com. She is available to law firms and their vendors for communications assignments. Complimentary consultation. No selling. 

 

Few Are Buying "Bot" Issue - So, If Musk Pulls Out, Where Does That Leave Twitter (and him)?

"Elon Musk is using a 'dog ate the homework' excuse to potentially back out of buying Twitter and there is now a less than 50% chance the deal gets done, Wedbush [analyst Dan Ives] says" Insider, May 16, 2022

Ives puts the odds of the Twitter deal going through at about 50%. He notes, as had The Wall Street Journal, that the bot issue is nothing new in the social-network industry. In addition, previous Twitter head guy Jack Dorsey had fixed much of the bot situation.

Out there the growing take is that Musk is getting financing jitters. Also, his current calculations for profits may not be what he initially had calculated. 

So, if he finds a way to pull the plug, where will Twitter be?

Ives points out that it will receive a $1 billion breakup fee.  (Unless Musk can have his lawyers figure a way out of that.)

He also posits that the Twitter stock could plunge to the 30s. Musk had put his purchase price at $54.24 a share. 

Right now (1:15 PM ET) the stock price is at $38.23, down today 6.03%. The 52-week high had been $73.34.

And, we can all speculate (gleefully) what might happen to the Musk brand.

Obviously, it will be tarnished. Probably badly. Like, the guy didn't do his homework and then he makes up a lame excuse for possibly exiting and expects us to believe it. We're annoyed. 

His style of leadership and management will no longer be the role model for how to operate a successful enterprise. Actually, boring is back. Fear is in the air globally. Fear makes us head to a safe harbor. Musk doesn't make us feel safe.

Connect with Editor-in-Chief Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

The (extreme) Folly of (expert) Projections - Embracing Scenario Planning

"Another stormy week has left investors groping when it comes to the direction of stocks and bonds. Expecting to be led out of the darkness by Wall Street’s best and brightest may be asking too much, given their performance so far this year." - Bloomberg, May 13, 2022

And the ridiculousness of reverence for projections by the Credentialed Crowd has spread to other categories of business. Already some businesses have embraced scenario planning. According to consulting firm Gartner:

"Scenarios are compelling descriptions of possible futures - not necessarily the most probable ones, but plausible, coherent and substantially different ones."

Instead of pontificating about the future - usually with heavy-duty assurance - those developing scenarios map out what is possible. In this era of the one-time unthinkables no longer unthinkable so much is possible.

My generation of 1970s Lost Humanities Scholars has been set in play by the US Government projection of a critical shortage of university and college professors in, yes you got it, the Humanities. The solution was to award the best and brightest graduating undergraduate three-year NDEA Title IV fellowships for doctoral studies. Tuition was paid, plus a generous monthly stipend.

I took the bait. Simultaneously, New Jersey Bell Telephone, where I had worked part-time throughout college, talked to me about a full-time position in public relations. Of course, back then there was blind faith in higher education. The more education, the better. I went off to pursue academic excellence.

On the way to my Ph.D. the market for Humanities professors collapsed. 

I floundered for almost four years after not landing a college teaching job. Then I did begin my first job in public relations. Here it is 2022 and I am still working in that field.

I never trusted the experts again. 

Connect with Editor-in-Chief Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.

Elon Musk Is No Hamlet - Trust May Be In Play

In business, trust is almost everything. It, for example, determines brand equity. That's exactly why top public relations firm Edelman measures that entity annually and publishes its Trust Barometer. 

ELON MUSK BRAND

Currently, Elon Musk could be losing lots of those trust points. His brand could be coming undone.

The Wall Street Journal takes on his contention that it's the number of fake accounts issue which had caused him to put the Twitter deal on hold. As the WSJ explains, that's not a new issue. Fake accounts have been embedded in social networks for years. And since those operating them keep improving their methodology they are not likely to go away.

WHAT THE GUY MIGHT BE UP TO

Few others are accepting the reason Musk had provided for backing off, at least temporarily. Instead there are stern questions about what this billionaire might be trying to do.

One line of thought is that he has old-fashioned buyer's remorse. And he is playing cute to exit the agreement on terms favorable to him. There is not a lot of sympathy there. Who hasn't gotten locked in a deal which represented not a smart decision.

Another hunch is that he intends to negotiate a lower sales price. The purchase was supposed to be at 54.20 a share. At the market's closing on Friday Twitter was at 40.72. Could Musk be leveraging his wild behavior to influence the stock price?

NO HAMLET

It's unlikely Musk is doing a Hamlet: Should he or shouldn't he. More likely this is strategic calculation. And its dynamics are reflecting badly on Musk. Maybe on all billionaires. If the business community decides he is trying to game the system - and is a type of bad actor - he could register low on any trust barometer forever. His ability to transact business could be limited. His style of leadership could become positioned and packaged as what not to do.

With this major a possible stunt a comeback could be impossible. After all, Twitter employees are in angst about their employment security. This is at a time when much of tech is laying off or will soon enough. The market for the skills of those at Twitter could be glutted.

NOT UNTHINKABLE

Reflection: Is Musk finished?

Connect with Editor-in-Chief Jane Genova at janegenova374@gmail.com.