« Requiem For Alex | Main | Change »

Comments

Greg

I am curious are you or will you seek to ask the same questions about the Romney campaign donor Alan B. Fabian, or Rudy Giuliani's campaign donor John Wren?

For those who do not know John Wren the CEO of Omnicom is a member of Rudy Giuliani's Republican presidential campaign finance team. Wren is currently the subject of a class-action lawsuit involving allegations of fraud.

John Wren is the "Media/PR/Advertising Industry Leader" for Giuliani's finance team, and faces fraud allegations as Omnicom's CEO for "off-loading" certain personal stocks to avoid recording any operating losses associated with those investments. The December 13, 2006, edition of Jack O'Dwyer's Newsletter, a weekly publication that covers the public relations industry, reported:

"Court papers that Omnicom has been trying to keep sealed for five years have been made public and they detail charges of fraud against CEO John Wren and CFO Randall Weisenburger as well as charges against OMC itself.

Wren and Weisenburger are said to have participated in the 'off-loading' of certain dot-com investments in 2000-2001 via personal ownership of stock and stock options and personal control of entities and that this was not fully reported to the SEC or even OMC's board of directors."

It has been also noted that that OMC 'parked' interests that it held in Agency.com and Organic with related-party entities to avoid recording operating losses linked with those investments. OMC ultimately took private the two entities it repurchased from Seneca. CEO John Wren and CFO Randall Weisenburger are said to be involved in the 'parking' of stock in Organic that they personally owned.

In a March 9 Marketing Week article, editor Stuart Smith reported that Wren "stand[s] accused of manipulating the share price with a falsely optimistic set of financial results." From the article:

"To most of us Seneca and Chaucer are history: two dusty old writers who happened to share an interest in biting satire.

Not so to John Wren and Randy Weisenburger, respectively CEO and CFO of Omnicom -- still the world's largest marketing services organisation. For them, these names have a vivid contemporary significance, and it's far from funny. Potentially, what they represent is a form of nemesis.

Seneca and Chaucer are the names of two corporate investment vehicles that are central to a four-year-old securities-fraud lawsuit in which the two most senior Omnicom executives stand accused of manipulating the share price with a falsely optimistic set of financial results. In other words, shareholders have been deliberately short-changed; or so the plaintiffs say. "

I read what you said about bloggers and I am curious as to why I had to get all this from a blogger web site such as Media Matters. I seemed to miss these stories in the newspapers, it seems like all the focus has been on Hsu, but these 2 men and these two stories have been virtually ignored, and not really been reported.

Peg

Try reading the Washington Post, Greg.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/19/AR2007091902508.html?hpid=topnews

I agree, however, that there isn't as much coverage in detail of any of the possible campaign financing misdeeds.

There should be.

I'm for getting rid of much of the constraints on giving - and trading that for lots and lots of transparency. Then publicize it.

And let the public decide what is and is not an issue.

Greg

I had already seen that article. It came after Media Matters had mentioned several times how the so-called liberal media had dropped the ball on it's coverage on these things. http://mediamatters.org/items/200709200010

Greg

One last thing, a question that still has not been answered. Why do you not hold Rudy, or any other Republican to the same standards that you call for the Democrats to do? You wrote about Hsu and Hillary, and if I had not highlighted these two incidents (and I will not even bring up Ted Stevens) there would be nothing mentioned about that on this blog. Talk about affirmative action, preferential treatment, something that might be considered hypocritical. Do not the same standards exist for all? And if so, why did it go unmentioned here?

The comments to this entry are closed.