General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHere's why a court found Kellyanne Conway too unreliable to testify in Whole Foods lawsuit
TRAVIS GETTYS
14 MAR 2017 AT 12:38 ET
Kellyanne Conway has gained a reputation for untrustworthiness since going to work for President Donald Trump, but a federal court once found her polling work too unreliable to be considered in a lawsuit filed by the government against Whole Foods.
The Federal Trade Commission sued Whole Food in 2007 to block the grocery retailers purchase of the rival Wild Oats chain over monopoly concerns, and the company hired Conways polling firm to support its case, reported Business Insider.
The FTC found a series of internal company emails and public blog posts that showed Whole Foods wanted to acquire its competitor because Wild Oats held a monopoly in some markets.
Whole Foods hired Conways firm, The Polling Company, to design a survey to back claims by a former FTC official who often testified for companies involved in antitrust suits.
That former official, David Scheffman, argued that Whole Foods and Wild Oats shoppers frequently shopped at other grocery stores, so the organic grocers couldnt raise prices without losing those customers to competitors.
more
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/03/heres-why-a-court-found-kellyanne-conway-too-unreliable-to-testify-in-whole-foods-lawsuit/
snooper2
(30,151 posts)As an expert witness for Whole Foods, Kellyanne Conway gave testimony that was deemed 'fundamentally flawed' and thrown out
The court found that the FTC's expert witness, Kent Van Liere, presented compelling evidence about the study's drawbacks, which the agency said suffered "serious and fatal design flaws, poor execution, and conclusions that are inconsistent with the survey's results," and failed to "meet basic standards" of survey research.
"My overall opinion in this matter is that Ms. Conway's survey methodology and procedures are fundamentally flawed and render her data and results unreliable," Van Liere testified, according to July 2007 court documents. "In addition, it is my opinion that her survey does not provide a reliable basis to assess the issues associated with consumer perceptions of the substitutability of products and services across food retailers."
Van Liere said Conway's response rate was "so low that her results cannot be considered reliable" and included "unqualified respondents" who could not "understand or could not complete the questions accurately." Her response rate, according to Van Liere, varied "from 6 percent to 0.5 percent" of callers the pollsters attempted to reach, and over 20% did not reside in the zip codes designated in the survey.
DonViejo
(60,536 posts)How long will you continue to refer to RawStory as "RipStory?" You were provided with information last week proving they don't rip anything from anyone.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Like Journalism doesn't have enough problems outside of assholes stealing from them.
Oh, and just because they have a single user Washington Post subscription doesn't justify their bullshit. If anything WaPo should get 90% of their clickbait ad revenue and they can keep 10%. That seems more than fair....
Do you work for them, get a cut or something? The vast majority of your posts are from RipStory
DonViejo
(60,536 posts)Talking Points Memo
The Huffington Post
The Associated Press
The UPI
Salon
The Washington Post
The New York Times
just to name a few
snooper2
(30,151 posts)writing a story and adding/linking to an original source is different than Rips Story outright stealing.
For example. Washington Post breaks a news story...other outlets will add to it as they do reporting and link to the original breaking story. Much different- screw RipStory
DonViejo
(60,536 posts)I've read articles in the Washington Post and the New York Times linking to articles in other publications that I just happened to post on DU the day before those papers published anything about them.
And the journalists at RawStory will be delighted to know you don't consider them to be journalists.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Just people who specialize in clickbait.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Raw_Story
DonViejo
(60,536 posts)and cannot be relied on for accuracy...just as the article itself states.
womanofthehills
(8,761 posts)If they rewrite a story, they do one of the best jobs of all the news sources in posting headlines. When news comes out that I want to paste to Facebook, I always use the Raw Story writers because they are almost like a NYC advertising agency the way they post an excellent headline. This is great for the Republicans on my Facebook who only read headlines - I bombard them with stories from Raw Story.
Raw Story is another good source off all the latest news in one place. I don't have to check 20 sources but can just go to Raw Story to get all the latest. I love that they update fast, unlike HuffPo which seems to leave the same stories up for half a day. If I want more detail, I can go to the source.
LeftInTX
(25,551 posts)Our local one does as does many others, such as USA Today etc.
LeftInTX
(25,551 posts)When I read a Raw Story article, I usually click the links.
Not all of us have subscriptions to the WaPo or NYT which are paywalled.
womanofthehills
(8,761 posts)Do I have to pay for all my news.? Half the time, I can't read WaPo either and I'm tired of having to pay for news.