Wal-Mart Uses Bloggers in PR Campaign

  By

Link: Economist’s View: Wal-Mart Uses Bloggers in PR Campaign.

A couple of months ago Mark Thoma posted a piece on Wal-Mart’s attempt to enter the world of banking, which took a fairly even look at both sides of the issue.

The next day he got an e-mail from one Marshall Manson who "does public affairs for Wal-Mart" and today he does us all a service by posting it on his weblog. Here are some of the best bits, but it is worth reading the whole thing.

Mark:

I hope you’re well. I just wanted to drop you a line and introduce myself… for my day job – I do online public
affairs for Wal-Mart, working with Mike Krempasky who runs Redstate.org…

It’s always a challenge when opponents organize to attack corporations. The
companies always seems to have one arm tied behind their backs when they try to
respond, so it’s nice to see folks like you defending them when it’s the right
thing to do [aside: Thoma’s piece was not defending them].

If you’re interested, I’d like to drop you the occasional update … Continue reading

Stuff and Status

  By

"Where money speaks, there all law is silent" – Anon, reign of Henry III (1216 – 1272).

MarketThinkers like the Cato Institute, have a blind spot when it comes to inequality, and David Schmidtz has it in spades, judging from his Cato Unbound lead essay "When Inequality Matters".

Schmidtz distinguishes two forms of egalitarianism: the "liberal egalitarianism" ("liberal" meaning something closer to conservatives or economic libertarians in the context of Cato Institute papers) and plain ol’ "egalitarianism". The former (which Schmidtz approves of) is focused on eliminating inequality of rank and status (the "right to command"), and Schmidtz is all in favour of getting rid of "any natural ranking of individuals into those who command and those who obey." Fair enough. The later is apparently focused on reducing inequality of (wealth) distribution, and this is not something Schmidtz likes. He sums the difference up by saying "Liberal egalitarianism has a history of being, first and foremost, a concern about status, not stuff."  Most of his essay is talking about why he opposes inequality of status, but is happy with inequality of "stuff".

But these two are absolutely and intricately mixed, as Anon recognized three quarters of a … Continue reading

Wal-Mart Extending Dominance of the Grocery Business – New York Times

  By

It is  easy to forget just how big and powerful Wal-Mart is, but you just need to look at its relationship with its suppliers to be reminded.

I thought Coca Cola (number 91 on the 2003 Fortune 500 with a revenue of $21 billion) and Pepsi Cola (numer 62, revenue of $26 billion) were pretty big companies  who controlled their own futures, but according to the New York Times today Wal-Mart has just finished telling Coca Cola not to introduce a diet soda they were going to introduce, and then went on to tell them what drink Coca Cola should make instead, and then it told Coke to change how it distributes Powerade, its sport drink.

Apparently they did the same thing to Pepsi: "Wal-Mart executives asked Pepsi sales representatives in Bentonville to
come up with a new diet soda in flavors not widely available" and Pepsi agreed. Apparently Wal-Mart likes drinks that use Splenda as a sweetener, and what Wal-Mart likes, it gets.

Of course, the official word around all this is that it is a partnership, that Wal-Mart makes suggestions, and that "it’s a collaborative process" but it is clear who is calling the shots. Charles … Continue reading

Tescopoly

  By

From Guardian Unlimited. Tesco is the UK Wal-Mart in that it has become over, the last decade or two, by far the biggest supermarket chain in the country. It is prompting  

an emerging and nationwide people’s revolt, erupting through the internet, against Britain’s number one supermarket, Tesco. Last week, as the Small Shops parliamentary group called for the creation of a retail regulator, more than 200 local anti-supermarket campaigns came together in an online alliance under the slogan "Every Little Hurts".

Continue reading

Why Globalization Works: Notes Part II

  By

Finally finishing my notes on Martin Wolf’s book. I was not
very impressed by the first third of the book, but the remainder is much
better, although it does have some big flaws. In fact, the book would be
a better one if Wolf had limited it to Part III (chapters 9 to 13) in which he
tackles the arguments of what used to be called the anti-globalization
movement. These chapters deal with the economic issues as Wolf sees them:
inequality, trade, the role of corporations, the role of the state and the WTO,
and finance.

So let’s deal with the good things first.

Wolf’s book is an argument against the “critics of
globalization”, or “new millennium collectivists” (henceforth the Cs of G). And
Wolf is, to be fair, faced with a problem because the movement (which hardly
seems to be one any more, unfortunately never having recovered from the massive
kick in the gut it received on 9/11, but that’s another story) is just that – a
movement. As a result it is, like most political movements, a mish-mash of
people … Continue reading

Why Globalization Works: Notes Part 1

  By

This is part one of some notes taken while reading Why
Globalization Works by Martin Wolf, and it covers parts I and II of the book.
I’m reading it because it is a well-respected book putting the case in
favour of globalization, a project I am in general opposed to (at least the way
globalization is usually defined).  It is a “brilliant book” (Lawrence
Summers, President, Harvard University), a “devastating intellectual critique
of the opponents of globalization” (Mervyn King, Governor of the Bank of
England), and “a definitive analysis” (Kenneth Rogoff, Harvard University).
Whether I’ll get around to part two of these notes is open to question.

                                                                                          * * *

Every academic discipline has its own way of putting itself
at the centre of the world. Chemists point out that everything around us and
inside us is made of chemicals. Physicists say that cosmology asks the only
questions worth answering. Literary theorists say that there is … Continue reading