Sorkin Jabs at Jobs to Drive Eyeballs (AAPL) (MSFT)
Tweet
Share
E-mail
Get Alerts MSFT Hot Sheet
Price: $390.99 +1.53%
Overall Analyst Rating:
SELL (= Flat)
Dividend Yield: 0.9%
Revenue Growth %: +14.7%
Overall Analyst Rating:
SELL (= Flat)
Dividend Yield: 0.9%
Revenue Growth %: +14.7%
Join SI Premium – FREE
On Tuesday, a column appeared in NY Times' DealBook, highlighting how Steve Jobs isn't a prominent giver to charity. The column was written by Andrew Ross Sorkin, a seasoned vet, author of "Too Big to Fail," knowledgeable about various financial topics, commentator on CNBC, and more.
Then, there came a response from Forbes' Eric Jackson, requesting Sorkin apologize to Jobs based on the timing and nature of the column.
So who is right? Should Sorkin apologize?
First, the author of this column, in his own opinion, thinks it's annoying and unnecessary when companies/wealthy individuals tout charity. Why can't they just donate the money and leave it at that? It all seems as some form of advertising, regardless of the timing or amount, as if to say "we're good for the community, we give away money, now come visit us!"
Second, as Jackson points out, Sorkin keeps alluding to public charity. Who knows what Jobs does behind closed doors? He's a Buddhist, generally a generous religion, and also soft-spoken religion. Sorkin even quotes in his column that friends of Jobs recall him saying to them that he could do more by building Apple than giving away money.
Third point, the latter half of the second point is logical. By building Apple as a company, he created jobs, commerce, and tax revenue for local and federal governments.
Fourth, he probably made others wealthy in the mean time, and they probably donated money to charity.
Fifth, Sorkin makes this point "Yet with not many exceptions, most American billionaires have taken up philanthropy in a public way and helped inspire future generations of charitable giving. And those that haven’t have typically come under scrutiny." and then this follows, "Before Bill Gates decided to focus on the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to give away their entire fortune, he was often cast as a greedy monopolist." Bill Gates stepped down as CEO of Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) in 2000, the same time he began to focus more on his, and Melinda's, charitable foundation. Maybe Jobs will do the same.
Sixth, Jobs is pretty sick, which means he may be leaving on a sour note, making the column worse. As Jackson points out, "If Steve Jobs was my father and I read this from Sorkin, I would want to go down to the Times’ (NYT) offices and scream at him: Have you no shame? I’d ask Sorkin, what if this was your father and someone wrote this hit job?"
There could be many more points about the two columns. It would appear that, of the two, Sorkin's was a little uncalled for. Why wasn't the column published last year, when Warren Buffett and Mark Zuckerberg, among others, pledged to give away their entire fortunes.
Whatever the case, talking about it is only promoting both columns, and is somewhat of a moot point.
On the web:
Sorkin's article
Jackson's article
Then, there came a response from Forbes' Eric Jackson, requesting Sorkin apologize to Jobs based on the timing and nature of the column.
So who is right? Should Sorkin apologize?
First, the author of this column, in his own opinion, thinks it's annoying and unnecessary when companies/wealthy individuals tout charity. Why can't they just donate the money and leave it at that? It all seems as some form of advertising, regardless of the timing or amount, as if to say "we're good for the community, we give away money, now come visit us!"
Second, as Jackson points out, Sorkin keeps alluding to public charity. Who knows what Jobs does behind closed doors? He's a Buddhist, generally a generous religion, and also soft-spoken religion. Sorkin even quotes in his column that friends of Jobs recall him saying to them that he could do more by building Apple than giving away money.
Third point, the latter half of the second point is logical. By building Apple as a company, he created jobs, commerce, and tax revenue for local and federal governments.
Fourth, he probably made others wealthy in the mean time, and they probably donated money to charity.
Fifth, Sorkin makes this point "Yet with not many exceptions, most American billionaires have taken up philanthropy in a public way and helped inspire future generations of charitable giving. And those that haven’t have typically come under scrutiny." and then this follows, "Before Bill Gates decided to focus on the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to give away their entire fortune, he was often cast as a greedy monopolist." Bill Gates stepped down as CEO of Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) in 2000, the same time he began to focus more on his, and Melinda's, charitable foundation. Maybe Jobs will do the same.
Sixth, Jobs is pretty sick, which means he may be leaving on a sour note, making the column worse. As Jackson points out, "If Steve Jobs was my father and I read this from Sorkin, I would want to go down to the Times’ (NYT) offices and scream at him: Have you no shame? I’d ask Sorkin, what if this was your father and someone wrote this hit job?"
There could be many more points about the two columns. It would appear that, of the two, Sorkin's was a little uncalled for. Why wasn't the column published last year, when Warren Buffett and Mark Zuckerberg, among others, pledged to give away their entire fortunes.
Whatever the case, talking about it is only promoting both columns, and is somewhat of a moot point.
On the web:
Sorkin's article
Jackson's article
Serious News for Serious Traders! Try StreetInsider.com Premium Free!
You May Also Be Interested In
- Apple suing OpenAI over alleged misappropriation of trade secrets
- Analysts explain why you should own this entertainment stock
- Citi says buy these 3 software stocks into Q2 earnings
Create E-mail Alert Related Categories
Insiders' BlogRelated Entities
Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Third Point LLC, Steve Jobs, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation TrustSign up for StreetInsider Free!
Receive full access to all new and archived articles, unlimited portfolio tracking, e-mail alerts, custom newswires and RSS feeds - and more!
