I understood it to be mocking the headline’s passive tone. The CEO is the one with much of the power to increase their own pay in a company, but the article is talking about it like some unknown magical entity just gifted this guy with $50 million.
And I think it’s also combined with the general sentiment that anyone making that much is stealing from workers.
The only issue with that is there is a corporate board and shareholders (only non-binding votes to show approval or displeasure i read in the nyt piece), but cant say you’re not wrong either in terms of the board. And maybe something to do with this:
Pay packages like these — when entertainment companies have been walloped by the shift to streaming from traditional television — played a major role in the union strikes. “They plead poverty, that they’re losing money left and right when giving hundreds of millions of dollars to their C.E.O.s,” Fran Drescher, the president of the actors’ union, said at July rally. “It is disgusting.”
Most of the big media companies slashed costs in 2023, laying off thousands of people and announcing plans to make fewer movies and television shows. But Mr. Zaslav and his lieutenants have been particularly aggressive, even shelving nearly finished content like “Batgirl” and “Coyote vs. Acme.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/19/business/media/david-zaslav-pay-package.html
I understood it to be mocking the headline’s passive tone. The CEO is the one with much of the power to increase their own pay in a company, but the article is talking about it like some unknown magical entity just gifted this guy with $50 million.
And I think it’s also combined with the general sentiment that anyone making that much is stealing from workers.
The only issue with that is there is a corporate board and shareholders (only non-binding votes to show approval or displeasure i read in the nyt piece), but cant say you’re not wrong either in terms of the board. And maybe something to do with this: