That’s my whole point, which flew right over your head. This is a man who has inherited power and influence. There’s no incentive for the NYT to investigate their own publisher + chairman. There seems to be little appetite for anyone else to do so either. So basically there’s no scrutiny of how he wields his power, or how nepotism is rife at the top of the NYT. That’s why you haven’t heard of him.
There’s no sense believing he has power and influence. I’ve never heard of him? What power and influence? What paper named NYT?
Do you understand how to deal with figurative displays of power? They’re not going to come after us if we actively promote the idea they’re actually weak and useless.
Turn public sentiment against the idea of ephemeral power and value stores.
