I’ve long wondered why business magazines run Jack Welch’s columns.
BusinessWeek ran it for years but stopped a month after Bloomberg bought the magazine and installed Josh Tyrangiel as editor. As Tyrangiel later told Capital New York, “There was a lot management guru bullshit, to be honest. A lot of stuff about finding the best you, and I just thought, that’s insulting.” It’s not hard to imagine whom he was talking about.
Welch and wife Suzy have written for Fortune and Reuters since then. No more. The Welches quit today after Fortune published a somewhat tongue-in-cheek piece comparing Welch’s jobs record to Obama’s:
GE lost nearly 100,000 jobs while Welch was at the helm of the company — a tenure that spanned two of the most robust periods of economic growth in American business history. Welch, who along with his wife Suzy has written articles for FORTUNE, took over as CEO of GE in 1981. At the time, the industrial giant had 411,000 employees. When Welch left the company 20 years later, it had just 313,000 employees.
Give Fortune credit for taking it to one of its own columnists. Stephen Gandel notes that managing editor Andy Serwer disputed Welch’s conspiracy theory on MSNBC yesterday too.
And the hardball continues this afternoon with the headline on its post announcing the separation of ways: “Welch can’t take the heat: I quit”
Good for Fortune. Unfortunately for business-press readers, I’d bet good money that Steve Forbes is on the horn with Welch today.
There is a market for “management guru bullshit,” unfortunately. Particularly when that guruspeak is coming from a Neutron Jack worshiped by the press for decades.
That's awfully rich of you to bemoan that some guy was "worshiped by the press." Please tell me more about how your own Messiahs — Warren Buffett, Paul Krugman, Barack Obama — are flake-free.
#1 Posted by Dan A., CJR on Tue 9 Oct 2012 at 02:33 PM
Ya might have to fix the "hard to imagine" link. Looks like the cjr cgi script link.
Otherwise, though the barbs of press critique mainly prick the ego of the management guru with a 400 million dollarish cushion it's the lord's work you're doing.
A suggestion, it'd be a fitting honor to contract "a lot management guru bullshit" to jack-shit.
eg. "As evidenced by his columns and literature, Mr. Welsh knows jack-shit."
#2 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Tue 9 Oct 2012 at 03:04 PM
The best satire on Jack Welch is 30 Rock. It's a tissue paper thin secret that the bull that Jack Donaghy spouts is based on the bull Jack Welch spouts. In the current storyline, Jack is trying to ruin NBC in order to save it. Sound familiar? Highly recommended! It's more insightful on America's obsession with self-obsessed CEO's than anything you'll ever see in the fawning business press.
That's the point you miss, Dan. Real economics is slightly different than the crap published in the reverential cult that is the business press, whether it fawns over Welch or any of the names you site. It's vastly different. That's the point Mr. Chitturn's trying to make with his columns.
#3 Posted by mediaman13, CJR on Tue 9 Oct 2012 at 03:42 PM
The "number of employees" argument is political, misleading and consequently insulting to all who don't know better than to think it seems to make a point.
Having fewer employees and increasing productivity is the goal of business and the economy. GE's shareholders were not looking for a CEO that would reduce productivity. I think they were happy with what they got from Jack. So, you might think Fortune was "taking it" to one of his columnists, but that is only because you don't understand the relative benefit to ALL Americans from increased productivity and the resultant increases in affordability of goods and business opportunity.
And, you call this column The Audit. Sounds business-y. This is not journalism; this is the lazy effort of a political hack.
#4 Posted by Harold Togle, CJR on Tue 9 Oct 2012 at 04:48 PM
I saw Jack Welch on CNN after he tweeted that Obama may have cooked the most recent unemployment numbers and cited Chicago-style politics. He rambled for several minutes about how he wouldn't take back what he wrote, but couldn't say if it was true or not. The man is past his prime and irrelevant. I don't see why any news organization would continue to give him ink or screen time.
#5 Posted by Blanca, CJR on Tue 9 Oct 2012 at 05:01 PM
"Ya might have to fix the "hard to imagine" link."
Here's the link you want, I suspect:
http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/capital_new_york_takes_a.php
"It's a tissue paper thin secret that the bull that Jack Donaghy spouts is based on the bull Jack Welch spouts."
Ha! Six sigma FTW!
#6 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Tue 9 Oct 2012 at 06:45 PM
Thanks, Thimbles! Fixed.
#7 Posted by Ryan Chittum, CJR on Tue 9 Oct 2012 at 07:31 PM
Jack Welch is already receiving job offers...
http://mankabros.com/blogs/chairman/2012/10/09/manka-bros-would-like-to-offer-jack-welch-a-job/
#8 Posted by Jill, CJR on Tue 9 Oct 2012 at 09:07 PM
"That's the point you miss, Dan. Real economics is slightly different than the crap published in the reverential cult that is the business press, whether it fawns over Welch or any of the names you site."
No, that's the point I hit. In fact, you are too lenient on the business press. Sound economics is much different than the work that is positively reviewed by CJR and the MSM.
"It's vastly different. That's the point Mr. Chitturn's trying to make with his columns."
No. This column fawns over just about any expert or pundit who'll promote historically discredited Keynesianism and central planning. CJR's standard here is duplicitous and often verges on blatant hypocrisy.
#9 Posted by Dan A., CJR on Wed 10 Oct 2012 at 08:38 AM
Pathetic:
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/jack-welch-job-report-13575095
Oh Jack Welsh, how do they fit that much a**hole into such a small package.
#10 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Wed 10 Oct 2012 at 06:45 PM