“Bizarre and ill-advised”

Posted by Rob Walker on July 12, 2007
Posted Under: Ethics

It will be interesting to see how this plays out: The WSJ has a story this morning about the fact that Whole Foods CEO John Mackey used to be a regular on Yahoo’s stock boards, talking up his own company, and trashing competitor Wild Oats, all under a fake name — “rahodeb.” Kind of like Lee Siegel. He didn’t do this two or three times, he did it for seven or eight years. One amusing example has Mackey writing, under a pseudonym: “While I’m not a ‘Mackey groupie,’ I do admire what the man has accomplished.”

Sheesh.

The Journal story is inconclusive on the legal implications. I go along with a securities law expert quoted saying that, “at a minimum, it’s bizarre and ill-advised.”

So what will happen? Even if there’s no illegality, I can imagine a negative-publicity feeding frenzy that causes Mackey serious problems.

I can also imagine that people will shrug it off because he generally seems to be a good CEO with impressive values, and this whole incident has only come to light by way of the FTC’s not-very-convincing argument that Whole Foods should be blocked from buying Wild Oats.

Although I’ve never reported on Whole Foods, I think all in all it’s a compelling company, and Mackey is a compelling CEO. But he was spectacularly stupid to do this. There’s just no reason for it, and reading that he was hyping is own stock, calling Wild Oats a “bad company,” etc. … that’s just gross. Plus his response to the whole thing on the company site isn’t very impressive. (Example: “I never intended any of those postings to be identified with me,” he writes. Uh, no shit. That’s part of the problem.)

I guess we’ll wait and see what happens next.

Further diversion may be found at MKTG Tumblr, and the Consumed Facebook page.

Reader Comments

Actually, not like me at all. You have your own narrative, it seems, so this probably won’t convince you, but I was using anonymity to protest the Internet convention of libelous anonymity. I really didn’t think I needed to protect my image on an obscure thread, inhabited by some real loons, that practically no one read. I’m an established writer, for heaven’s sake. I just didn’t like anonymous commenters saying things like “Siegel wanted to fuck a child.” (Do you publish comments like that? Or plain insults? Bet you don’t.) You’re not going to like the way I put this, but it was a question of journalistic ethics, in a situation where no one was enforcing them. It was, you should pardon the expression, the principle of the thing.

I also only did it a five or six times. FYI

#1 
Written By Lee Siegel on July 12th, 2007 @ 4:17 pm

It’s a fair point, the five or six times vs. seven or eight years of it, and there’s another dimension involved when he’s talking about his own public company.

I do publish insults directed at me, but you’re right that I wouldn’t post a profane, anonymous, insult comment, certainly nothing like that example. You’re also right that the apparent new-media tradition of anonymous trash talk is not a good thing. I dealt with more of it when I wrote for Slate, and here is my highlight reel:
http://www.powells.com/blog/?p=898

Nothing as bad as your example, but still. It never struck me as a good idea to wade into it. But maybe in my case — unlike you or Mackey — the very notion of a third-party defender/fan is so transparently remote I simply sensed I’d be outed instantly.

Last note on this: To my surprise, I haven’t heard/seen much criticism of Mackey for this, maybe people are only interested in when journalists and critics and writers do it?

Thanks for the comment…

#2 
Written By murketing on July 12th, 2007 @ 4:51 pm
Previous Post: