Welcome to Dez Reads, where I curate some quick analysis of the interesting, quirky, and thought-provoking things our staff is reading this week.
While there’s a lot of good stuff in this mid-May edition (our people are submitting so much content that I haven’t secured any column space for myself in weeks), I’d like to call out Steven Schlein’s take on whether or not an aspiring VP should brag about murdering a puppy in cold blood (spoiler: no), and Anne Marie Malecha’s dive into some contradictions in the “green investing” space. Also, this week, we get a sneak peek into Will Kim’s wardrobe.
Feel free to write in with your thoughts, criticisms, or questions for our staff. Maybe we’ll get around to publicizing our responses to some reader submissions!
Here we go.
Economics.
Reuters. Uber & Lyft Show Growing Trend of Workers Returning to the Office
The recent earnings reports from ride-sharing companies Uber and Lyft provide additional insight into the return to the office trend. Both companies highlighted revenue gains and provided key data points that show workers are trending toward a return to normal commuting patterns.
Erin Brewer, Lyft’s C.F.O., noted, “Total rides grew 23 percent year-over-year, reflecting strong demand across use cases. Growth in early morning commute and weekend evening trips was particularly strong, which is a continuation of the trends we saw in the back half of 2023.” While Uber’s C.E.O. Dara Khosrowshahi said, “We see the weekday commute use case being particularly strong as people are coming back to work.” He added that the company had lost some of its most frequent customers during the pandemic.
Now that we are four years removed from the start of the pandemic, businesses – particularly those with expensive leases in major cities – appear to be subtly shifting toward a return to the pre-pandemic protocols and office environment. We will see how this lands with a workforce that has grown accustomed to avoiding a lengthy commute for at least part of their week and a subset of workers that entered the workforce having never had to do a commute at all.
– Mike Bova
Technology.
CNN. When grief and AI collide: These people are communicating with the dead
The death of a loved one leaves an unimaginable void for those left behind. It’s completely reasonable to want to hear their voice again and now thanks to AI you can. Generative AI tools including Snapchat’s MY AI, ChatGPT Voice and ElevenLabs allow the grief stricken to create voice avatars of those they’ve lost. They can answer questions, provide advice, offer feedback and support that depending on how much source material you can provide can closely mimic the person you’re missing.
Grief is fickle, it’s an incredibly individual experience, and you find yourself looking for solace in whatever form it may come. While I can’t imagine using this technology personally, I’m not here to judge those who are, and I hope it continues to bring them peace. However, I can’t help but question whether this avatar is an avenue for perennial avoidance or a tool to work through loss and grief. It’s one thing to keep someone’s memory alive, it’s another to have an AI-enabled version of them in your pocket or purse, accessible at a moment’s notice.
– Anne Marie Malecha
Politics.
MSNBC. Kristi Noem has somehow made her puppy-killing scandal worse
The early 20th Century science fiction writer Robert Heinlein (“Starship Troopers”) wrote: “Every man should shoot his own dog.” He, of course, was talking about putting down an old family dog that was suffering towards the end of its life. Heinlein believed it was a sign of good character for a man to do the deed himself instead of pawning it off on someone else. A century later, we have a politician, Gov. Noem of South Dakota, who thought she could get some kind of street cred by bragging in her autobiography that she shot a misbehaving puppy.
Having worked on one presidential campaign, two House races and two Senate races, I think I know a thing or two about how a politician should present his or herself to the public. Had I been asked, I would have stated the blindingly obvious: “Let’s not talk about the puppy shooting!” What’s making it worse is that she is following through on her publicity tour, she’s inexplicably trying to deflect blame toward President Biden for his dog’s past propensity for biting. There are two public relations maxims at play here: When you’re explaining, you’re losing, and the public is smarter and less prone to distraction and spin than many communicators think. This episode is going to dog her (I couldn’t help myself!) for the rest of her career.
– Steven Schlein
Business.
WaPo. Can the fast-fashion giant Zara rebrand as luxury?
Disclaimer: This is not sponsored content from Zara. And I don’t think it needs it, as its parent company, Inditex, saw its sales rise to a record high of $39 billion this spring. How did Zara, which was just recently seen as a fast fashion store that is only good at imitating luxury brands for cheap, take the next step in becoming a more serious fashion label?
The answer lies in its successful rebranding efforts. For example, Zara has built new collections that are more original than just luxury knockoffs. Its Origins line is focused on “building a contemporary wardrobe,” while its SRPLS line is an “innovative wardrobe system that’s built for now.”
Having owned a few pieces from these collections myself, I can confirm that these are not marketing buzzwords. Zara’s rebranding efforts are backed by avant-garde clothes that are not ruined after one wash and help you be trendy without breaking the bank. As Guido Palau, a renowned stylist, said, “Zara is a designer brand now.”
Zara’s rebranding offers two lessons for consumer marketing: First, relate to the wants of your customers, which are always changing. Second – and perhaps most importantly – let your products do the rest of the talking.
– William Kim
Forbes. Untangling Climate Risk, Financial Risk, And Climate Impact
In this day and age, anything and everything can be politicized, and more often than not, issues are politicized to advance a specific agenda. Shareholder activism has become more frequent and more intense, as well as a key focus area for our firm over the past decade. Proxy fights, shareholder proposals, and full-scale influence campaigns are often par for the course – these tactics are becoming especially common in activist fights over climate change.
Oxford University professor Robert E. Eccles puts together a masterful takedown of the “increasingly ubiquitous incantation,” that “climate risk is financial risk.” This is not inherently true. Nor is fossil fuel divestment a fast track to net-zero.
Most of the discussion around climate and finance somehow ignores the fact that institutional investors, first and foremost, have a fiduciary responsibility, not a moral one. And while activists love the soundbite, conflating the financial thesis for green investing with the goal of saving the planet is fraught. Eccles contends that “framing climate-related financial risk as a tool to deliver net-zero outcomes not only politicizes efforts to manage financial risk, but it also holds us back from having an honest conversation about what is actually needed to deliver net-zero outcomes.”
As someone who is in the business of persuasion, I’m always here for a good influence campaign. However, intellectually honest conversations are critical in order to truly address societal challenges, and I appreciate Eccles’s sober, depoliticized take.
– Anne Marie Malecha