S.L. Mintz of BNET writes about research out of Stanford University about company earnings conference calls that parses what executives say and how they say it for clues as to whether they’re lying.
“For their part, CFOs did not betray deceptions with extreme positive or negative emotions and avoiding the first person. They were more apt though than CEOs to overstate certainty.
“Nuance matters, of course. Indictments should not hinge on verbal clues alone. But in the high-stakes scramble to discern fragile truth during conference call Q&A sessions, unwitting word choices by executives might tell you something ominous that that numbers conceal.”
Read more here.
Fox Business host Larry Kudlow has no plans to leave his role amid reports detailing…
Morgan Meaker, a senior writer for Wired covering Europe, is leaving the publication after three…
Nick Dunn, who is currently head of CNBC Events as senior vice president and managing…
Wall Street Journal editor in chief Emma Tucker sent out the following on Friday: Dear…
New York Times metro editor Nestor Ramos sent out the following on Friday: We are delighted to…
Rahat Kapur of Campaign looks at the evolution The Wall Street Journal. Kapur writes, "The transformation…