Citizens in the European Union can ask to be removed from search engines if the results are "inadequate, irrelevant, no longer relevant, or excessive." Google recently removed a news article from the BBC due to one reader's complaint. Marketplace Weekend host Lizzie O'Leary and Ben Johnson of Marketplace Tech look at what that means for individuals in the EU and themselves. Could the decision lead to a slippery slope of censorship?
Click play above to hear Lizzie and Ben discuss what the ruling means
You might not recognize the image of Eileen Ford, who died this week at the age of 92. But you surely know some of the faces she made famous: Christie Brinkley, Naomi Campbell and Elle Macpherson, to name just a few.
She also made them rich. Ford and her husband Jerry created Ford Models, which was for decades the most influential modeling agency in the world.
When they launched the enterprise in the 1940s, modeling wasn't really a business. Some held it in low regard.
"First of all models were one step above showgirls and showgirls were one step above prostitutes," says Michael Gross, author of Model: The Ugly Business of Beautiful Women.
Gross says Jerry and Eileen Ford made modeling a true profession and revolutionized how models were paid, by setting up a fee structure.
"A model would take a picture, but her pay depended on how that picture was used. So if it was used in an ad she would get one check. If it was used in a tag hanging off a dress she would get another. The Fords were amazing at doing that and at raising the daily rate and the hourly rate of models," he says.
Gross says by the 70s models were pulling in as much as $100,000 per fashion show. Today, supermodels like Naomi Campbell make millions.
Some of Ford's discoveries went on to big successes in other professions, including media mogul Martha Stewart, who was a Ford model in the 1960s.
Despite the fact that Eileen Ford built an empire, she regarded herself as a woman of limited talents, which she wryly noted in a documentary.
"Let me point out to you that I have absolutely no talent. I could only do one thing. I could find models," she said.
Ford Models is no longer owned by the family, but it's still big in the business of multi-million dollar faces.
President Obama has announced a new initiative meant to help small businesses. It's called SupplierPay and it’s designed to get big companies to pay their smaller suppliers faster.
The White House says 26 companies — including big guys like like Apple and Coca-Cola — are participating in SupplierPay. They’re promising to pay the small businesses they hire for parts or services more quickly, ideally within 15 days. That sounds like heaven to small business owner Rexanne Metzger.
Now, she says, “There’s a very few corporations that will pay in 30 days. It’s more like 45 days.”
Metzger is president of Davis Interiors, in Norfolk, Virginia, which makes custom interiors for Navy ships. They're a supplier for the big defense contractors, but she’s had to take out a line of credit to cover her bills. Even if those companies paid her just a few days faster, she says, it would provide some relief.
“It does help because then we don’t have to pay that interest on our line of credit," she explains. "Every day that we don’t get paid costs us money.”
Small businesses across the country are feeling the pinch of late payments. Janet Sanders sees it every day. She’s CEO of Incom Direct, which helps small businesses process credit card payments. Sanders says now, her average client needs the day’s charges fast.
“At the end of the day he wants those electronic transactions converted to cash as quickly as possible – put back in his bank account," she says.
Big companies have been taking longer to pay their small suppliers since the recession.
“It’s free money, basically,” says Charles Mulford, who teaches accounting at Georgia Tech.
Mulford says big corporations are taking 35 to 40 days to pay, a few days more than before the economic downturn. He understands why they do it.
“The larger companies can essentially borrow from the smaller companies and not pay interest, in effect, on that money,” he says.
Will the president’s SupplierPay initiative help? Mulford says that’s not clear. But at least it’ll call attention to the problem.
INTRO: Small businesses play a vital role in the economy. Creating nearly two out of every three new jobs in the US, according to the White House. When they hurt, the rest of the economy suffers. So today President Obama today announced a new initiative meant to help the little guys. It’s called SupplierPay. And it’s designed to get big companies to pay their smaller suppliers faster. Marketplace’s Nancy Marshall Genzer reports.
MARSHALL GENZER 1
Twenty six companies are participating SupplierPay. Big guys like Apple and Coca Cola. They’re promising to pay the small businesses they hire for parts or services quickly. Ideally within 15 days. That sounds like heaven to small business owner Rexanne Metzger. Now…
ACT REXANNE METZGER :05
“There’s a very few corporations that will pay in 30 days. It’s more like 45 days.”
MARSHALL GENZER 2
Metzger is president of Davis Interiors, in Norfolk, Virginia. They make custom interiors for Navy ships. Working as a supplier for the big defense contractors. She’s had to take out a line of credit to cover her bills. She says, even if those companies paid her just a few days faster, that would help.
ACT REXANNE METZGER :07
“It does help because then we don’t have to pay that interest on our line of credit. Every day that we don’t get paid costs us money.”
MARSHALL GENZER 3
Small businesses across the country are feeling the pinch of late payments. Janet Sanders sees it every day. She’s CEO of Income Direct, which helps small businesses process credit card payments. Sanders says now, her average client needs the day’s charges, fast.
ACT JANET SANDERS :08
“At the end of the day he wants those electronic transactions converted to cash as quickly as possible – put back in his bank account.”
MARSHALL GENZER 4
Charles Mulford teaches accounting at Georgia Tech. He says this is a trend. Big companies have been taking longer to pay their small suppliers since the recession.
ACT CHARLES MULFORD :02
“It’s free money, basically.”
MARSHALL GENZER 5
Mulford says big corporations are taking 35 to 40 days to pay. A couple days more than before the economic downturn. He understands why they do it.
ACT CHARGLES MULFORD :08
“The larger companies can essentially borrow from the smaller companies and essentially not pay interest on that money.”
MARSHALL GENZER 6
Will the president’s SupplierPay initiative help? Mulford says that’s not clear. But at least it’ll call attention to the problem. In Washington, I’m Nancy Marshall Genzer for Marketplace.
The second-largest cigarette maker in the U.S., Reynolds American, is trying to acquire the third-largest cigarette company in the U.S., Lorillard. The deal speaks volumes about the current and future state of the tobacco industry.
While smoking has declined in the U.S. (18 percent of adults smoke here), the U.S. remains a major profit center for the tobacco industry – while it accounts for only 5 percent of volume, it produces 14 percent of all revenue globally. Tobacco firms have been raising prices to offset declining demand. Consolidation helps cut costs, and a duopoly could make raising prices in the future even easier.
Also factoring into the deal: Lorillard owns Blu e-cigarettes, a market leader in a small but persistent cigarette alternative. Finally, Lorillard also owns menthol-flavored Newports. Premium menthol-flavored cigarettes like Newports are the one area of the industry where sales are flat or barely declining, and Newports have very strong brand loyalty.
If the cigarette industry is slowly burning out, Reynolds is buying a few extra years on its life.
Graphic by Shea Huffman/Marketplace
The federal Highway Trust Fund runs out of money at the end of the month. It's been paid for by gas taxes since 1993, but raising taxes is a tough political sell, and right now Congress can't agree on what to do about it.
Meanwhile, Jersey City, NJ is in the middle of a construction boom.
Those two things may seem unrelated, but Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop says if the fund runs out of money, it could put the kibosh on the growth.
And to understand, it’s important to take a look back at the recent history of Jersey City.
“If you go back two decades, this was an example of urban decay,” Fulop says. “Most of downtown was rail yards. And if you go back twenty some odd years, they were giving these brownstones away. This was actually the most financially and economically challenged portion of the city that we're standing in right now.”
Now, construction cranes tower above the city in almost every direction.
“We're going to overtake Newark as the largest city in New Jersey, and I can comfortably say that the 20 largest buildings in the state will be in Jersey City in the next four years,” Fulop says. “We're building 54 stories, 60 stories, 70 stories, another 55 story, I mean I could go on and on. And if you walk down here you'll see the cranes, and activity, and people working … those are generally concentrated around mass transportation.”
Building around mass transit has been a cornerstone for Jersey City. And a good portion of the money that goes towards mass transit in the state comes from the Highway Trust Fund. In New Jersey, the average person pays about $600 per year in those taxes.
Fulop says if that money were to dry up, then contractors, developers and others in the building industry would lose faith in future funding and slow down – or stop – ongoing projects.
“And once they stop, they’re hard to get back started,” Fulop says.
The Highway Trust Fund was created in 1956. It's been funded by gas taxes, but the tax isn't tied to inflation, so it's gotten less bang for its buck since the 90s. And like many things in Congress, the trust fund is a fight. Conservatives say the program is bloated, and needs to be reformed. But Mayor Fulop, a Democrat, doesn't see it that way.
“At the end of the day, it's a partnership between federal, state and local,” Fulop says. “And anybody who says that government doesn't have a role in building infrastructure is an absolute moron. I don't know how else to say it.”
Right now, there are a couple plans to pay into the fund lasting until next Spring, but no long term solutions have been agreed upon.
This story comes from our Tumblr museum of regret: I Can't Believe I Bought That
I HAVE A BLACK BELT IN THE ART OF BUYER’S REMORSE
For me, the statute of limitations on not feeling stupid about a purchase is never. Many is the time I have ordered plumbing parts online or electronic do-dads on Ebay, only to find out they were close but not, in fact, compatible. One purchase, however, soars high above the rest in provoking a shattering sense of self-loathing, buyer’s remorse to the twelfth power, or as Edith Piaf never sang, “Oui, je regrette.”
Back when Otis was a little kitty, my spouse Mary and I were wandering a pet store when a curious contraption caught our eyes. It was a kit that promised to teach the cat to use the toilet, meaning the actual toilet bowl. If this thing worked there would be no more cat litter, no more scooping, just a dainty flush now and again. This, of course, would be the answer to a dream.
I remember Mary being appropriately skeptical but game to give it a shot. She figured at $19, or whatever it was, the purchase would be worth the risk. I, by contrast, was all in, fully convinced this was the $19 that would change everything.
Inside the plastic wrap of this kit we found two items: a step-by-step instruction sheet and a stiff piece of cardboard the size of a toilet seat, embossed with a series of concentric circles like the elevation lines of a low-resolution topographical map. The concept was this: we were to lay the cardboard flat on the toilet and in the initial phase of training, place a cluster of kitty litter in the middle of the platform so Otis would get the idea. Over time, once the cat got used to doing his business on this cardboard and porcelain perch, we would tear out the inner-most circle of cardboard to make a hole. Next, we waited a few more days and as kitty got more comfortable, we were to progressively enlarge the hole by stripping out ever-widening rings of the cardboard. Eventually, like the grin on the Cheshire cat, all the cardboard would be gone, leaving just the maw of the toilet upon which kitty could balance, let ‘er rip and be done.
Here was the problem: The cat was having none of this. When we tried to gently place him on the cardboard, he flailed in that "Are you out of your freaking mind?" way that cats get. When we finally lulled him into giving it the old college try and he accomplished the initial leg of his mission, we celebrated. This just might work.
Then I made an error that put the word “cat” into “catastrophic.” With Otis still nosing about the bathroom, I hit the handle on the commode. It was one of those high-pressure, low-flow toilets that goes beyond flushing and seems to detonate with pyrotechnic ferocity. The cat was alarmed. I was alarmed. The cat would forever associate the toilet with the explosion of flushing and that was that.
Perhaps with a different toilet, different humans or a different cat, the experience would have been different. I sincerely hope that others have found success with the kitty kit. But to this day and every single day, we are reminded of this one purchase. The memory is triggered every time we clean a cat box, enveloped in the acrid stink of buyer’s remorse.
This week, Lizzie O'Leary sits down for brunch with New York Magazine contributing editor Jessica Pressler and Business Insider's Executive Editor Joe Weisenthal to discuss the economic news of last week and what's on their plate this week (get it?).
Had “Sports Illustrated” existed in 1900, its swimsuit issue would not have been especially titillating. Back then, the standard lady’s swimsuit wasn’t much different than her everyday clothes. It was basically a dress, plus a hat and even shoes.
By World War II, with fabric in short supply, slightly more revealing two-piece numbers were considered okay. But even they didn’t expose anything so scandalous as a — gasp! — Belly button.
But post-war? A couple of Frenchmen sensed the world was ready to loosen up. The first of them — one Jacques Heim — designed a two-piece so tiny he called it “l’atome.” The Atom.
But Heim was one-upped by his countryman, Louis Reard. On July 5th, 1946, he unveiled an even tinier suit: “The Bikini.” Named after a Pacific island atoll where, four days earlier, an atomic bomb had been tested. Reard claimed he had “split The Atom.”
Public reactions were … extreme. Reard got 50,000 fan letters thanking him for the invention. Mostly from men. But in some countries, shocked lawmakers instated bikini bans. Reard happily embraced the controversy. In ads, he said bikinis were small enough to be "pulled through a wedding ring."
Soon, the anti-bikini lobby collapsed as the suit became popular on beaches all over Europe and finally — in 1960 — in the U.S.A. The same year singer Brian Hyland scored a number-one hit about a girl too embarrassed to be seen in one.
This story comes to us courtesy of our friends at Dinner Party Download.
It’s been three months since the Islamist group Boko Haram kidnapped more than two hundred schoolgirls in Nigeria. The Nigerian government has yet to free the girls, and it’s come under criticism for its handling of the crisis. It’s also been shamed by the global campaign #BringBackOurGirls, which even Michelle Obama got in on.
So what’s a country with a bad rap to do? Get some PR, of course.
“I think there is a narrative that the government was not doing enough,” says Mark Irion, president of the public relations firm LEVICK, which signed a $1.2 million contract to galvanize support for the Nigerian government and its fight against terrorism.
LEVICK’s motto is "Communicating trust." Irion says much of the storyline about Nigeria’s tepid response to the crisis “is not true.”
“There are things that are underway and are public,” he says. “And there are things that, of course, cannot be publicly discussed. But, yes, there is a false narrative that we intend to correct.”
It’s no coincidence the Washington Post recently ran an op-ed from Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan. “My silence has been necessary,” he wrote, “to avoid compromising the details of our investigation.”
(Here’s a tongue-in-cheek response to that piece.)
J. Peter Pham directs the Africa Center at the Atlantic Council. He says the fact is Nigeria has failed to deal with Boko Haram over the years.
“You cannot spin that reality any more than you can spin the fact that there are more than two hundred schoolgirls still missing and Boko Haram continues to attack with impunity throughout northeastern Nigeria,” he says.
Now, trying to improve the image of foreign governments is nothing new. It’s big business for PR firms like Ketchum Inc., which made more than $10 million from its foreign clients last year, including the Russia Federation and Gazprom. (You can see that tabulation here, via the Sunlight Foundation.) Ketchum continued to represent Russia through the turmoil in Ukraine.
Still, part of this business is knowing who to represent and when to stop.
“You know everyone has their own litmus test,” says Toby Moffett, a former Congressman who used to run The Moffett Group. That was the M in the PLM Group, the trio of firms that lobbied and did communications for Egypt under Hosni Mubarak and the military council that replaced him.
That representation continued until Egyptian police raided U.S.-backed NGOs and barred some Americans from leaving the country.
“I did receive a call from a friend who happened to be President Obama’s Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood,” Moffett recalls. “And Ray was not happy, to put it mildly.”
LaHood’s son was one of the Americans who was temporarily trapped in Egypt. Moffett says he would’ve dropped the Egypt account anyway. Still…
“You know there was that kind of gentle persuasion, shall we say,” he says.
When it comes to foreign governments, it turns out gentle persuasion can run both ways.
One postscript: In October, Egypt signed a new contract with another communications firm, The Glover Park Group. That representation will cost the country $250,000 a month.
Host: It’s been three months since the Islamist group Boko Haram kidnapped hundreds of schoolgirls in Nigeria. The Nigerian government has yet to free them … it’s also been shamed by that global campaign … hashtag-bring-back-our-girls. Even Michelle Obama got in on that. So what’s a country with a bad rap to do? Get some PR, of course. Kate Davidson reports.
Here’s what Nigeria’s image problem sounds like:
News montage: The authorities had no number for how many girls were taken/The country’s first lady expressed doubts that there was any kidnapping./A government with no idea where they are – We want our girls back now. Now.
That … is a PR nightmare. Which is why someone in Nigeria called in the image pros.
Irion: I think there is a narrative that the government was not doing enough.
Mark Irion is president of the public relations firm Levick, which signed a 1.2 million dollar contract to galvanize support for the Nigerian government and its fight against terrorism. Levick’s motto is communicating trust. Irion says much of the storyline about Nigeria’s tepid response…
Irion: …is not true. There are things that are underway and are public. And there are things that, of course, cannot be publicly discussed. But yes, there is a false narrative that we intend to correct.
It’s no coincidence the Washington Post recently ran an op-ed from Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan. “My silence has been necessary,” he wrote, “to avoid compromising the details of our investigation.” J Peter Pham directs the Africa Center at the Atlantic Council. He says the fact is Nigeria has failed to deal with Boko Haram over the years.
Pham: You cannot spin that reality any more than you can spin the fact that there are more than two hundred schoolgirls still missing and Boko Haram continues to attack with impunity throughout Northeastern Nigeria.
Now, trying to improve the image of foreign governments is nothing new. It’s big business for PR firms like Ketchum … which made more than ten million dollars from foreign clients like Russia last year. Ketchum continued to represent Russia after it annexed Crimea. Still, part of this business is knowing who to represent and when to stop.
Moffett: You know everyone has their own litmus test.
Toby Moffett is a former Congressman who used to run The Moffett Group … one of the firms that lobbied and did PR for Egypt under Hosni Mubarak, and the military council that replaced him. Until, that is, Egyptian police raided US-backed NGOs and barred some Americans from leaving the country.
Moffett: I did receive a call from a friend who happened to be President Obama’s Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood. And Ray was not happy, to put it mildly.
LaHood’s son was one of the Americans who was temporarily trapped in Egypt. Moffett says he would’ve dropped the Egypt account anyway … but …
Moffett: You know there was that kind of gentle persuasion, shall we say.
When it comes to foreign governments, it turns out gentle persuasion can run both ways. I’m Kate Davidson, for Marketplace.
Corn prices fell to a record low; it hasn’t been this cheap in almost four years. Weather conditions are favorable for the crops at this point, and that means surpluses. But with so much corn, can farmers sell it all?
"There are still real nice markets out there," says Keith Alverson, a sixth-generation ethanol corn farmer in Chester, South Dakota. "It’s just a matter of what price point you want to market it at."
Alverson says although there's huge demand for corn, there's still an abundance of it that needs a home. So what does an ethanol corn farmer do with all of their extra corn?
"We are gearing it up for storage," says Alverson. They’ve added more bunker storage to hold the corn and are preparing for a big harvest.
Over the past few months, Alverson says he's seen a big change in corn prices. A bushel is going for about $3.50 now, about $1.00 to $1.50 less than it was a year ago.
But Alverson says he's confident he will still sell his corn and manage his profits accordingly.
"Just like any other business, you try and lock in your margins," says Alverson. "We made some grain sales ahead of time at nice profitable levels, and we try to manage out costs wisely."