From: Richard Gottlieb <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 00:14:11 -0500
Joe, as almost always, gets it right.
Close to incompetent reporting.
Anyone who has been in publishing
for the last twenty years, caught this.
From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 22:11:06 -0500
I don't want to defend Pearson, but surely that article in Politico
could have been fact-checked. A good place to begin would have been
by using Pearson's own Financial Times or its half-interest in the
Economist. Such an investigation would have revealed that Pearson is
not the owner of Penguin Random House (that must have come as a shock
to Bertelsmann) and that the statement of how Pearson really got going
in the U.S. is simply wrong, as the acquisition of the U.S.'s largest
and most profitable textbook publisher, Prentice-Hall, was already
I am sure there are a bunch of bad guys at Pearson. But what is
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:02 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> From: Bernie Reilly <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 01:35:16 +0000
> The in-depth report on the British publishing giant Pearson in today’s
> Politico (“No profit left behind”)
> is a timely sequel to a recent New Yorker piece on Jeb Bush’s links to
> the for-profit education industry. One Pearson executive recently
> claimed that Pearson is the largest aggregator of student information.
> Bernie Reilly