Maybe The New York Times should have hired Walmart’s vice president of corporate communications for its executive editor post.
In response to a Times opinion piece by Timothy Egan entitled “The Corporate Daddy,” David Tovar of Walmart’s communications team posted a red-penned “first draft” to the company’s blog that points out some glaring errors and gaping holes in Egan’s article.
“Thanks for sharing your first draft,” says Walmart’s note atop the Times story. “Below are a few thoughts to ensure something inaccurate doesn’t get published.”
In his piece, Egan called the corporate giant a “net drain on taxpayers” and alleged that the company “force[es] employees into public assistance with its poverty-wage structure.”
“We are the largest taxpayer in America,” Tovar responded. “Can we see your math?”
Egan knocked the chain over a sign in an Ohio Walmart last year that asked for food donations so employees could “enjoy Thanksgiving.” The writer called the story “a perfect symbol of what’s wrong with the nation’s most despised retailer.”
“To clarify,” Tovar expanded, “associates were helping associated during unexpected hard times (fires, divorce, loss of life, etc.). And a noble cause, no doubt.”
He also corrected Egan’s detail about Walmart claiming its average full-time store worker is paid at least $12 per hour. “Be specific,” wrote Tovar. “Full time average associate wage is $12.91.”
The edited copy also included a “possible addition” to Egan’s paragraph about Walmart’s “fortune” of profits, namely a sentence that spotlights the $1 billion the company gives in cash and in kind donations annually.
It’s not only that Egan’s assertions were inaccurate or incomplete; Tovar also pointed out how certain cited facts simply don’t back up the writer’s claims. For example, Egan referred to a Lake Research Partners poll that found 28% of consumers view Walmart unfavorably to show the “public distain” for the corporation.
“Pretty sure any corporation, politician even media outlet would like to have a 72% favorability rating,” Tovar commented. To put the number into perspective, only 47% of Americans currently have a favorable view of President Obama.
At the end of the draft, Tovar suggested the piece be entirely scrapped.
“Better idea for a piece,” he suggested. “Could focus on bringing back US manufacturing … and expanding education, training, and workforce programs, i.e. things that will make a bigger difference, not just focusing on starting wages.”
Unfortunately, Egan’s inaccuracies are already live on the web for all to read.
