Search results

I have said that she has every right to sit on the board in proportion to her shares. If the other directors see signing the charter as being a requirement that is there business. She can attempt to change it, but she is not the only one who is involved in the company and if the rest of the...

Exactly my position on the matter. Why should she be the only director not to sign the agreement to impose editorial direction on the news media? What special rights does she have? A lot of these concerns are coming from those rabid leftie socialist scums, the fellow board directors.

So, you are comfortable with someone riding roughshod over existing business charters because they are used to getting their own way? I have no issues with Rinehart owning a share, nor having an appropriate number of seats on the board. However, to do this, she has to sign a document...

And that she wants to override the respected practice of directors not using the paper as their own party political platform. You really think any journalism would be undertaken into her activities if she succeeds? I'm not comfortable with losing a free media. Others, it seems, aren't...

No argument from me. And it sums up my issue with her. She is demanding special treatment. She wants to change the fundamental management ethos there for her own gain, above what she has put in.

There is a difference between business control and editorial control. There would be no issue with her being on the board if age would sign the piece of paper saying that she won't turn the paper into her own propaganda rag.

The issue is she refuses to sign the charter to become a member of the board. This states that she will not use her position to influence editorial position. This is a long standing Fairfax position. Her arrogance means she doesn't see it as applicable to her, unlike other individuals.