Monday, December 7, 2009

12/7/09: Bank of America employee fired for "helping customers"? Really? No. (User outrage erupts; "HuffPost: Approved!!!")


Summary: Did Bank of America really fire an employee for "helping customers"? Of course not. But that didn't stop HuffPost from posting such a blaring headline, and from approving and deciding to publish many of the hate comments that were incited by such an inflammatory, misleading smear against BofA. Ironically, BofA paid for display ads to appear on HuffPost this day --- and ironically, they appeared in close proximity to this article. What was it Stalin said? Oh, right: "When we hang the capitalists, they will sell us the rope." And don't miss the Addendum items, which document Ms. Huffington's naked assault on BofA, one of the site's top advertisers.

On December 7, 2009, HuffPost decided to publish an original story by one of its Washington, DC reporters, Arthur Delaney, with the title:

Bank Of America Employee Fired After Helping Customers

Let's think about that for a moment.

All banks (especially the "big" ones) are supposed to be irredeemably "greedy," right? Only focused on the bottom line. And as anyone in business knows, it's very expensive to recruit and train a new employee who's competent and customer-focused.

So why would BofA, one of the world's largest banks, "fire" an employee who...
"helped customers"? It sure didn't get to be one of the biggest and most successful businesses in America by wasting money on unnecessary employee turnover. Even the ultra-left Human Rights Campaign lists BofA as one of the "Best Places To Work for LGBT Equality," a distinction among many that it has earned for employee and community relations.

The answer, of course, is that BofA didn't
"fire" an employee who..."helped customers."

This is but the latest in HuffPost's continuing pattern of generating false/misleading headlines, which serve to incite rage and misconceptions among the radical leftists it attracts.

To HuffPost's credit(!), the truth behind this employee's firing is actually contained within Delaney's story:

Bank of America fired Jackie Ramos after she took a stand against the bank's $15 "convenience" charges and $39 over-the-limit fees so she could sleep better at night.

"There was something inherently evil about my job," the 23-year-old said in a YouTube video she uploaded on Nov. 27, two days after her termination.

"Ms. Ramos clearly violated some bank policies, particularly around misrepresenting customer information," said spokesman Tony Allen. "Perhaps more egregious, she encouraged customers to misrepresent their information."

(N)ot all customers qualify for modification programs that will help them, and Ramos grew tired of saying no after six months on the job.

"So I stopped denying people,"
said Ramos. "I helped people get on programs that they didn't necessarily qualify for but who definitely needed the help."

So what we have here is an employee who:

  • Knowingly submitted falsified customer information to give them benefits for which they were not qualified, instead of making her concerns known to her supervisors, and working to change them.
  • May have even committed violations of numerous laws concerning fraud

And yet, HuffPost holds Ms. Ramos up as some sort of hero.

How would HuffPost react to a similar situation in its midst?

We can't help but wonder: How would HuffPost react if, say, it discovered that one of its employees had "helped" a user by disclosing certain corporate information that the employee was contractually (if not legally) prohibited from sharing?

Say, for instance, this information concerned the truth behind the biggest myths about HuffPost? Or how HuffPost enables and protects the most egregious violators of its Comment Policies and Terms of Service, while banning non-violating users, some after as as as few as six comments? What if this information consisted of documentation showing that HuffPost was aware that some of these violators had threatened or urged violence against other users and public figures (
here, here, here, here)? And one who even received an in-home interview by the U.S. Secret Service due to such "comments"?

What if the employee disclosed this information because he/she "got tired of saying no" to requests for such information?

We suspect that HuffPost's management might have a slightly different take on this matter, should anyone claim tha
t it fired this employee for "helping customers."

And ironically, Bank of America is actually paying for this smear

Are you now ready for a cruel irony?

HuffPost placed this story right between two ads for Bank of America:

We can't help but wonder what BofA's advertising manager must be thinking about now, regarding the value of actually paying to advertise so prominently on a website that does something like this.

Note: Also see: 8/16/09: Sprint executive killed; users unleash hatred (HuffPost: "Approved!!!"), in which a Sprint ad was placed in the most expensive spot on HuffPost --- as its users were permitted to unleash their hatred against one of its executives in the comments section.

* * *

So what kinds of user comments do you think this "story" generated --- all of which HuffPost reviewed, approved and decided to publish?

Scan the thread for yourself: Bank Of America Employee Fired After Helping Customers

Feel the love!

(And in case the thread gets mysteriously thrown down the memory hole, we've archived several pages that demonstrate what this misleading headline incited.)


ADDENDUM 1, Dec. 31, 2009:
In a year-end tribute to its big bank advertisers, HuffPost urges its readers to... stop doing business with them

HuffPost's splash headline for December 31, 2009:

And when you click to to the story page, here's what comes up --- note the Bank of America advertisements at the top and right margin:

So what kinds of user comments do you think this "story" generated --- all of which HuffPost reviewed, approved and decided to publish?

Let's take a look at a few:

tstm89 8 fans permalink
From my own past experience, Bank of America treats its customers like pure trash.
The only time they care about you is when someone is stealing from "you."
That of course is only because its actually THEM who is being stolen from.
Posted 12:35 AM on 12/31/2009
justwaitandsee 53 fans permalink
My money has been since there since the early 1990's when B of A pissed me off.......
Posted 12:30 AM on 12/31/2009

8 fans permalink
Gosh I hope this snowballs. I couldn't think of a more appropriate, indeed poetic, movie to begin a movement--a 21st century style movement.
Posted 11:10 PM on 12/30/2009

yogajan 29 fans permalink
[...] The funny thing about B of A is that I have never heard anything good about them, yet people continue to use them for their banking.
I am obsessive about watching how my money is handled and morally, I just can't let B of A get their hands on it.
Posted 10:09 PM on 12/30/2009

CarmanK 41 fans permalink
Bank of America rips off their bank customers and their credit card customers in particular.
If you have an account with Bank of America, I suggest you move your money. [...]
Posted 10:26 PM on 12/30/2009

If its advertising choices are indicative of the other business decisions that Bank of America has been making, it's little wonder how it into trouble.


ADDENDUM 2, Dec. 31, 2009:
HuffPost's assault on advertiser Bank of America continues

Later on December 31, 2009, right below the other big news of the day (Rush Limbaugh taken to hospital), HuffPost put up the following as a "news" story:

Side note: Remember, HuffPost claims that its blogs (opinion articles) are to be placed along the left margin, and that news items are to be placed long the center and right columns: "Huffington told me Breitbart's news headlines would run on the right side of the home page while the group blog would be on the left side -- perhaps a not-so-subtle play on their political orientation." While this policy is generally followed to this day (more here), in this case, it was clearly abandoned in order to advance HuffPost's own leftist jihad against Bank of America.

The story thread is here:

WATCH: Woman Documents Closing Her Account With BofA, Switching To Community Bank

Note: And in case you were wondering, yes, the Rush Limbaugh in hospital thread incited the predictable celebration and death wish comments from HuffPost users, which of course it reviewed, approved and decided to publish, even though such comments are supposedly violations of its Comment Policy & Terms of Service. So not only is Bank of America supporting its own smearing by the very publication it's paying to feature its ads, as has been documented before (1, 2, 3, 4, 5), it is also paying to support the facilitation of hate speech in general.


ADDENDUM 3, Jan. 6, 2010:
Arianna Huffington goes on TV to teach people how to move money away from big banks (including her advertisers)

Offered without comment:

See the "story" thread here.


ADDENDUM 4, June 8, 2010:
HuffPost's assault on Bank of America continues

And get this --- now they're able to write the whole expense off of their taxes, through the legally-questionable "HuffPost Investigative Fund"!!!
Universities Make Millions Selling Access, Addresses To Bank Of America

After HuffPost's collusion with, and shilling for the SEIU political terrorists who stormed the home of a Bank of America executive a few weeks ago (1, 2, 3), perhaps BofA will finally wake up and sue the shiite out of Arianna Huffington and her minions for libel, defamation, and anything else their attorneys (Greg Baer, anyone?) can cook up.


No comments:

Post a Comment