World&aposs top 20 worldwide air routes revealed – and they’re just about all in Asia

Many of the world’s 20 busiest air routes have been in east Asia, without any representatives from either the United kingdom or even the US.

Based on market research by Routesonline, Hong Kong is way in front of all of those other world for top-intensity worldwide air links.

Eight from the top 20 routes begin or finish in the city’s Chek Lap Kok airport terminal, range from the busiest: Hong Kong to Taipei, using more than 450,000 passengers in This summer alone.

That actually works out at greater than 10 people one minute flying the 500 miles backward and forward metropolitan areas, night and day.

Cathay Off-shore carries nearly half the passengers on the way, with the remainder divided between Hong Kong Airlines and also the Taiwanese carriers Avoi Air and China Airlines.

Singapore has five routes within the top 20, such as the second and third-most popular: to Jakarta and Kl correspondingly.

Other metropolitan areas which are prominent within the rankings include Osaka, Bangkok and Manila. Two metropolitan areas, Tokyo, japan and Seoul, have two airports each featuring within the top 20.

The greatest-rated non-Asian route is between Moscow Domodedovo and Simferopol in Crimea (twelfth), with 186,000 passengers in This summer.

As the global community regards the Crimea as Ukrainian territory – making the environment link an worldwide route – the Foreign Office notes: “Russian forces and pro-Russian groups established full operational control in Crimea.”

The only real other non-Asian link is between Dusseldorf and Palma, around the island of Mallorca, coming 16th with around 166,000 passengers. This route is extremely periodic, with far less vacationers in the winter months.

The Routesonline researchers say: “The busiest worldwide routes were calculated by utilizing OAG to obtain the best players routes on the planet by capacity in This summer 2017, and then ranking them by passenger statistics on Sabre.”

London, which handles much more worldwide air travel passengers than every other city, doesn’t come in laptop computer – which views only airport terminal-to-airport terminal links, instead of city-to-city connections.

If all of the capital’s airports were incorporated, the path from London to Dublin could be second simply to Hong Kong-Taipei when it comes to passengers traveled.

The world’s busiest domestic air routes have much more passengers, with Seoul to Jeju Island way in front of the rest.

World’s busiest worldwide air routes, according to quantity of passengers transported in This summer

1 Hong Kong-Taipei 451,801

2 Jakarta-Singapore 322,488

3 Kl-Singapore 269,395

4 Seoul Incheon-Osaka Kansai 233,920

5 Hong Kong-Shanghai Pudong 225,888

6 Taipei-Osaka Kansai 200,131

7 Seoul Incheon-Hong Kong 197,935

8 Bangkok-Hong Kong 197,313

9 Taipei-Tokyo, japan Narita 197,175

10 Kl-Jakarta 195,988

11 Hong Kong-Singapore 187.128

12 Moscow Domodedovo-Simferopol 186,239

13 Singapore-Bangkok 173,660

14 Hong Kong-Beijing 169,666

15 Seoul Gimpo-Tokyo, japan Haneda 166,402

16 Palma-Dusseldorf 165,758

17 Seoul Incheon-Bangkok 163,274

18 Osaka Kansai-Hong Kong 163,154

19 Hong Kong-Manila 162,647

20 Manila-Singapore 156,522

Source: Routesonline

Reuse content

Mnuchin travelled on government jet to Washington following appearance at Trump Tower

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin travelled on the government jet from New You are able to City to Washington carrying out a news conference with President Trump recently at Trump Tower, based on a Treasury investigator now reviewing the trip.

The flight, first as reported by ABC, joins a number of costly citizen-funded journeys taken by Trump’s Cabinet secretaries, which critics have slammed as a total waste of public funds.

Mnuchin travelled to Washington aboard a C-37 piloted and maintained through the U.S. Air Pressure after Trump’s August. 15 news conference, where obama blamed “both sides” for brutal violence days earlier throughout a clash of neo-Nazis and protesters in Charlottesville, Veterans administration.

Mnuchin, an old banker and hedge-fund manager who had been became a member of in the brief event by Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, was behind Trump and offered no comments throughout the event. This news conference was known as to go over the administration’s infrastructure plans.

Federal agencies who request government jets are needed to compensate the military for travel expenses. The C-37, a military-outfitted form of the Gulfstream V executive jet, includes a reimbursable rate as high as $10,000 an hour or so, Government documents show.

The 200-mile path between New You are able to and Washington is among the best-connected travel routes in the united states, and millions have maneuvered it via one-hour commercial flights and three-hour journeys aboard passenger trains for example Amtrak’s Acela Express.

Defense Department policy calls government air transportation “a premium mode of travel involving expense and limited resources” and states “every effort will be designed to minimize travel cost.”

Officials told ABC that Chao also required the federal government jet not less than one leg from the Trump Tower appearance. Agency officials didn’t react to demands for comment.

A Dod spokesperson referred inquiries to the environment Pressure, which didn’t immediately respond.

The Trump Tower flight was under per week before Mnuchin and the wife, Louise Linton, travelled to Louisville, Ky., on the government jet to go to a lunch and go to the nation’s gold vault at Fort Knox, where Mnuchin also viewed the solar eclipse.

Mnuchin’s office also requested a government jet fly him and Linton on the honeymoon visit to Europe this summer time. Treasury officials stated the request is made to ensure use of secure communications throughout the trip and it was withdrawn before any flight.

The official within the Treasury Department’s Office of Inspector General stated both Mnuchin’s Trump Tower and Fort Knox flights are presently under review.

The state declined to provide further details until officials are “able to carry out a complete analysis of methods these trip demands and authorizations were staffed and reviewed.”

Inside a statement, a Treasury spokesperson told The Washington Publish, “We welcome the OIG’s review and therefore are making certain work has delicately for any full look at our travel procedures.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) recently requested a “detailed explanation” of methods Mnuchin justified using the military plane to Fort Knox. A Treasury official authored back now saying the company “considered numerous travel options” before requesting the federal government jet.

The Mnuchin situation marks a minimum of the 3rd open review by an inspector general into travel expenses for Cabinet secretaries, who’ve typically traveled on cheaper commercial airlines for domestic flights.

The and Human Services inspector general is investigating reports that Secretary Tom Cost travelled aboard costly chartered planes not less than 24 citizen-funded flights, a spokeswoman stated Friday. The official in Price’s office defended the flights as “Secretary Cost, getting outdoors of D.C., ensuring he’s associated with the actual United states citizens.Inches

The Ecological Protection Agency’s inspector general also announced recently it had begun investigating Administrator Scott Pruitt’s frequent visit his home condition of Oklahoma.

Repetition. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.), the ranking member of the home Oversight Committee, stated inside a statement Friday that “too many Trump Administration officials come with an titled, uniform mindset with regards to squandering citizen money.”

Lurid Lawsuit’s Quiet End Leaves Silicon Valley Start-Up Barely Dented

SAN FRANCISCO — At Upload, the parties never seemed to stop.

The start-up began by hosting impromptu gatherings to promote virtual reality as the next big thing. It quickly became an entertainment and news hub for the VR industry, hosting hundreds of events. The crowds were young and eager to network. Models did demos, and the liquor flowed.

The freewheeling atmosphere was not restricted to the evening hours. There was a “rampant sexual behavior and focus” in the Upload office that created “an unbearable environment,” a former employee, Elizabeth Scott, said in a lawsuit filed in May.

Elizabeth Scott, a former employee of Upload, sued the start-up in May, claiming “an unbearable environment.”

Ms. Scott said in her suit that the Upload office had a room with a bed “to encourage sexual intercourse at the workplace.” It was referred to as the kink room. Men who worked for the company were described in the suit as frequently talking about being so sexually aroused by female colleagues that it was impossible to concentrate. When Ms. Scott, Upload’s digital media manager, complained about the hostile atmosphere and other issues in March with her supervisor, she was fired, the suit said.

In a statement after the suit was filed, Upload said that “our employees are our greatest asset” and that “these allegations are entirely without merit.” The company said Upload’s chief executive, Taylor Freeman, and president, Will Mason, could not discuss the lawsuit and its specifics. On Friday, as this article neared publication, the men issued another statement that said, “We let you down and we are sorry.”

At a time when Silicon Valley is filled with tales of harassment and discrimination against women — just this week, the chief executive of the lending start-up Social Finance resigned amid accusations of sexual misbehavior — the purported behavior at Upload stands out. Ms. Scott said in the suit that while she was at a conference in San Jose, Calif., Mr. Freeman kicked her out of her room in Upload’s rented house so he could use it for sex.

Interactive Feature | Interested in All Things Tech? The Bits newsletter will keep you updated on the latest from Silicon Valley and the technology industry.

If the claims were striking, so was the response.

In contrast to the venture capitalists who were knocked off their perches this summer by harassment complaints, Upload was scarcely dented by the publicity surrounding Ms. Scott’s suit. Mr. Freeman and Mr. Mason were not forced to resign. Investors did not pull their money. The company’s events continued, if in terms that were a bit more muted.

A few weeks ago, the suit was crossed off Upload’s to-do list when it was quietly settled for a modest sum, said two people with knowledge of the case who asked to remain anonymous because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

Both sides had an incentive to come to terms: Upload could say the problem was now in its past, and Ms. Scott, 26, got a victory of sorts without the risk of going to trial.

Shortly after Ms. Scott filed her suit, at least a half-dozen members of Upload’s team quit in solidarity, but they did not go public with their complaints. (At its peak, the company had about 20 to 25 employees.) In interviews, two of those who left described what happened but said that even though they were now working elsewhere, they did not want their names used.

“A lot of people were afraid to be in the media,” said another former employee, Danny Bittman, who broke his silence with a piece in Medium this week in support of Ms. Scott. “We were scared of everything that was happening.”

Behind the scenes, in members-only Facebook groups and other forums, the virtual reality industry is still roiled. People have opinions, they just do not want to be caught uttering them.

“People privately assumed the worst — that the Upload allegations are all true,” said Kent Bye, who does a popular industry podcast, Voices of VR. “Or they assumed the opposite — that the allegations are salacious, crazy and can be ignored. Regardless, they don’t want to risk their career by publicly talking about a connecting node for the entire industry.”

In more than two dozen interviews for this story, even those inclined to see Upload in the most favorable light said it was the story of a company run by young, immature men who were flush with cash and did not know how to handle their power.

That is true of many Silicon Valley start-ups. Some grow out of it. Others, like Uber — which fired 20 employees this year in a harassment scandal that ultimately pushed out much of its top management team — do not until they are forced to.

The situation at Upload was particularly fraught because its principal product was parties. In the great tradition of Silicon Valley start-ups, the company was less interested in making a profit than in getting attention, said former employees. So the line between work and play, often fuzzy, was entirely erased.

The existence of the kink room became the enduring symbol of Upload as soon as Ms. Scott filed her suit. Employees of the porn site Kink.com came to an early Upload party and left behind a sign, said two people with knowledge of the events. It became the name of a room toward the front of the office, a narrow chamber equipped with a bed.

“There was a lack of leadership to cultivate a healthy work environment, and investors who failed to take a more active role in oversight,” Mr. Bye said. “The only way to resolve these sorts of problems is to confront them head on, and that is precisely what no one seemed prepared to do.”

Tech’s Fresh Start

Upload was founded in 2014 as entrepreneurs — many of them women — flocked to virtual reality. There was a feeling of vast potential in the young industry, a sense of being able to make a mark by moving quickly and meeting the right people.

Upload was the place to do it. Two of the founders — a third had dropped out — were in their mid-20s, with energy and ideas but not many credentials. Mr. Freeman, the chief executive, listed “backpacking in Europe” and “freelance user experience designer” on his résumé.

Before becoming Upload’s president, Mr. Mason was an intern at a Florida design studio. A 2014 graduate of Stetson University in Florida, he began an online petition at Change.org in 2015 to remove the school’s first female president, Wendy Libby, labeling her “cancer.” The petition got little support.

“I tend to be fairly passionate about things and wear my heart on my sleeve,” Mr. Mason explained in an email about his petition. “Looking back, there are definitely ways I would handle this differently.”

Although Upload’s ambitions were ill-defined, the company was popular from the start. It quickly raised $1.25 million. One of its most prominent early investors was Joe Kraus, a Silicon Valley veteran who is now at GV, Alphabet’s venture capital arm. Mr. Kraus, who invested $25,000 of his own money in Upload, was described by the company as an adviser. He declined to be interviewed.

Larger sums came from Shanda Group in China and, in a second funding round of $4.5 million, Colopl, a Japanese mobile gaming company. Colopl’s Shintaro Yamakami is the only non-Upload employee on the company’s board. A spokeswoman for Mr. Yamakami said he was currently “refraining from public relations activity.” A spokeswoman for Shanda, an investment firm, said, “We do not have comments to offer.”

Ms. Scott joined Upload in April 2016. She had graduated in 2012 from Emory University, where she was president of a group called the Alliance for Sexual Assault Prevention.

She declined to be interviewed. Her mother, Jenny Scott of Gainesville, Fla., said, “Elizabeth had several incidents growing up that targeted her physical safety and developed her sense of right and wrong.”

Ms. Scott, whose Facebook page describes her as “short, sassy & blonde. Take it or leave it,” managed the stories generated by Upload’s writing team on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Snapchat, Instagram and YouTube, produced videos and handled relationships with software developers.

She said in the suit that she had other work, too: The women at Upload were required to do what were called “womanly tasks,” including cleaning up. They were also told to act like “mommies” to the men and help them with whatever they needed.

The suit presented a portrait of a deeply entitled male culture, one that clashed with the fresh start VR seemed to offer the tech industry. But Ms. Scott’s suit was the second in the virtual reality industry in just a few months to present such an unwelcoming picture.

Magic Leap, a VR start-up backed by Google and other high-profile investors, had been sued in February by a woman who said in her complaint that she had been hired to make the company more diverse and friendly to women.

The woman, Tannen Campbell, said in court papers that she had challenged Magic Leap “to acknowledge the depths of misogyny” in its culture that “renders it so dysfunctional” it threatened the company. The suit accused the company of gender discrimination and retaliation, which Magic Leap denied. It was settled in May.

Across the tech industry, sexual harassment appears to be ingrained. While the research is largely anecdotal and fragmentary, Chloe Hart, a Ph.D. candidate in sociology at Stanford University, said the subject came up often in 27 in-depth interviews she had with female engineers about their social interactions at work.

Two-thirds of the women, Ms. Hart said, had experienced unwanted sexual interactions, such as being groped or kissed, or hearing comments about the physical attractiveness of women colleagues and sexual jokes or references that made them uncomfortable. One-third talked about men they worked with expressing romantic interest that was not reciprocated.

This and other surveys suggest that in some ways, Silicon Valley has not evolved much over 50 years, even as more and younger women arrived.

Some young women said they did not expect much from Silicon Valley. Amanda Joan, a VR developer, said the “misogynistic and lewd culture” described in Ms. Scott’s suit was as common to Silicon Valley as heavy traffic and expensive housing.

“If I were to boycott every organization that exhibited such culture and behavior (publicly or behind closed doors), I would be severely limited in my options,” Ms. Joan wrote on LinkedIn last month. “Honestly, I wouldn’t hold my breath that there would be any left unless I moved to Wonder Woman’s home island.”

‘A Boisterous Culture’

About 11 months after Ms. Scott joined Upload, Ms. Scott said in her suit, she complained to a supervisor about the office atmosphere, about being shunned by Mr. Freeman and Mr. Mason and about being paid less for equal work and forced to perform menial and demeaning tasks. She was subsequently fired.

That was in March, after Mr. Freeman and Mr. Mason had been named to Forbes’ 30 Under 30 list of rising stars.

All the success on the surface masked a workplace where, one former employee said, “women are seen as the candy in the room.” At Upload events, VR technology was demonstrated by women hired from a company called Models in Tech. Ms. Scott’s suit said the founders tried to secure “submissive Asian women” for a fund-raising trip to Asia.

“Upload was a boisterous culture, a ‘bro’ culture,” said another former employee, Greg Gopman, in an interview. “Virtual reality is hyped and no one was hyping it more than Upload. Within the industry, they were loved for giving people attention in the most positive way. They had a lot of clout and were able to act as they wanted until someone called them out.”

Mr. Gopman, 33, is mentioned in Ms. Scott’s suit. Other male employees, the suit said, would talk about how he “refuses to wear a condom” and “has had sex with over 1,000 people.”

When asked about being mentioned in the suit, Mr. Gopman, who has drawn attention in tech circles before for criticizing homeless people, said he was not happy about it. “How am I going to get married some day if I have to explain that?” he asked. Upload declined to comment on its former employee.

Mr. Freeman, the chief executive, said in an interview that the company was moving on. The lesson he learned, he said, was that employees need to talk more, and that especially in times of trouble they need someone to hear their complaints. Under the agreement to end Ms. Scott’s suit, Mr. Freeman was precluded from discussing it.

“A lot of things could be avoided if there is an open line of communication,” he said. “Once you have five people, male or female, at a start-up you need external HR. Not having someone to go talk to about your potential concerns just makes it so much worse.”

He added, “We’re the strongest as a company that we’ve ever been because of this.”

As for Ms. Scott, she now works for a camera company. She told friends that she had numerous interviews with VR companies, but as soon as they found out she had filed suit against her previous employer, they all declined to hire her.

Sheriff’s Badge

A woman runs Upload now. Kind of.

Anne Ahola Ward, a specialist in increasing internet traffic, was a consultant to Upload. In June, when many of the employees were quitting, she proposed taking over. Her title is chief operating officer.

“Anne has had a lot of experience, and experience is a huge thing,” Mr. Freeman said. He demurred when asked whether she was the “adult supervision” that all start-ups are said to need. “We’re all adults here,” he said.

Ms. Ward, 38, is wry about the opportunity.

“I’m a woman in Silicon Valley,” she said. “Do you think someone would have handed me the keys to a start-up that wasn’t beleaguered?” Her husband asked the obvious question: Why aren’t you the chief executive? “The title isn’t important to me,” she said.

The kink room is now Ms. Ward’s office. There is no bed there. She has instituted mandatory anti-harassment training: a two-hour session led by an outside consultant. There is now a human resources department. People have formal job descriptions. And as a joke — but not quite — people in the office gave Ms. Ward a sheriff’s badge.

Correction: September 15, 2017

An earlier version of this article incorrectly reported Elizabeth Scott’s age. She is 26, not 27.

‘It Was a Frat House’: Inside the Sex Scandal That Toppled SoFi’s C.E.O.

SAN FRANCISCO — For months, the text messages came. Some were flirtatious, asking her to meet him late at night. Sometimes, the texts were sexually explicit.

The messages were directed at Laura Munoz, an executive assistant at the online lending start-up Social Finance. The texts were from her boss, Mike Cagney, the company’s chief executive, according to five people who spoke with Ms. Munoz or saw the messages. Given Mr. Cagney’s stature at Social Finance, known as SoFi, Ms. Munoz was at a disadvantage.

That became apparent when SoFi’s board was informed of Mr. Cagney’s communications with Ms. Munoz in late 2012. The board said it found no evidence of a sexual relationship. Ms. Munoz was then paid about $75,000 to leave the company, according to three people familiar with the proceedings who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk publicly. Ivo Labar, a lawyer representing Ms. Munoz, said matters were resolved between his client and SoFi.

Around the same time, SoFi’s board and executives also heard complaints from investors that Mr. Cagney had made misstatements to them over the start-up’s student loan products, according to emails between investors, executives and the board that were obtained by The New York Times. Directors stood by Mr. Cagney in that instance, too.

The board’s support allowed Mr. Cagney to build SoFi into a fast-growing start-up that is trying to take on the big banks by offering lending, insurance and asset management online. The company has been valued at more than $4 billion.

But within SoFi, Mr. Cagney, a married father of two, continued to raise questions among employees with his behavior. He was seen holding hands and having intimate conversations with another young female employee, according to six employees who saw the two together. At late-night, wine-soaked gatherings with colleagues, he bragged about his sexual conquests and the size of his genitalia, said employees who heard the comments.

Mr. Cagney’s actions were echoed in other parts of SoFi. The company’s chief financial officer talked openly about women’s breasts and once offered female employees bonuses for losing weight, according to more than a dozen people who heard his comments. Some employees said on a few instances, they caught colleagues having sex with supervisors at SoFi’s main satellite office in Healdsburg, Calif., which was the subject of a sexual harassment lawsuit filed last month.

Even as other Silicon Valley companies such as ride-hailing giant Uber have been in the spotlight this year for inappropriate treatment of women, Mr. Cagney’s case goes a step further. Although many of the issues at other firms stemmed from the actions of midlevel executives or investors, Mr. Cagney personally faces questions about his role. His conduct was described by more than 30 current and former employees, most of whom asked to remain anonymous for fear of retribution.

The behavior went largely unchecked until Monday, when SoFi’s board acted after weeks of growing scrutiny of the company. The start-up said Mr. Cagney, 46, would leave as chief executive by the end of the year and that he would step down immediately as chairman. In a statement announcing Mr. Cagney’s departure, SoFi did not explain the executive change.

The company said its business was performing well, and that SoFi was becoming a “major, innovative player in consumer finance.” A SoFi spokesman said the company did not comment on personnel matters and disputed that its business had taken on too much risk. Through the spokesman, Mr. Cagney also said he “vehemently denies” any improprieties at after-hours events with colleagues.

Yet Mr. Cagney’s position had become increasingly delicate after the filing of the sexual harassment suit, which accused him of “empowering other managers to engage in sexual conduct in the workplace.”

His situation was also exacerbated by claims about his approach to SoFi’s business, which uses money from Wall Street investors to fund student loans, personal loans and mortgages. At several points, Mr. Cagney ignored warnings from colleagues that he was being too aggressive with the business, according to more than a dozen employees who were involved in the conversations.

That included a time when Mr. Cagney decided to put customer service representatives in charge of lending determinations, despite them having no experience in the area. Another time, he told investors that SoFi had $90 million in debt financing for a loan product; the company did not in fact have the money, according to the internal emails reviewed by The Times.

SoFi’s board, which includes representatives of Japanese conglomerate SoftBank and the influential hedge fund Third Point Capital, now faces questions about whether it needed more checks and balances on Mr. Cagney.

Companies like SoFi show how boards are incentivized to prioritize cash flow and growth over governance, said David F. Larcker, a professor at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business who specializes in corporate governance. “The board now has a duty to correct for things that have gone wrong,” he said.

The board said that it found “no allegation or evidence of a romantic or sexual relationship” between Mr. Cagney and Ms. Munoz and referred all other questions to SoFi.

Workplace Pursuits

Mr. Cagney, who was born in New Jersey, started his career in finance in 1994 at Wells Fargo, where he climbed the ranks to the trading desk. He later left the giant bank to begin a financial software company, and then his own hedge fund, Cabezon, in 2005. On the side, he attended Stanford’s business school.

In 2011, Mr. Cagney began SoFi with several co-founders. The start-up, established as venture capitalists were getting excited about financial technology, raised nearly $100 million in its first year. In total, SoFi has now taken in $1.9 billion from investors including SoftBank, Discovery Capital and Baseline Ventures.

Even with other co-founders, Mr. Cagney quickly established himself as the company’s center of gravity. SoFi’s offices, with glassed-in conference rooms and cheap Ikea furniture, were set up in San Francisco’s Presidio, the park near the Golden Gate Bridge, because Mr. Cagney’s hedge fund already had its offices there. His home was less than a mile away.

Mr. Cagney exhibited an aggressive attitude at the office that he may have learned as a trader at Wells Fargo. He sometimes shouted obscenities and excoriated employees in front of others when they made mistakes.

Mr. Cagney hired deputies who had similar characteristics. One was Nino Fanlo, a former executive at Goldman Sachs and the private equity firm Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, who became SoFi’s chief financial officer in 2012.

Mr. Fanlo, 57, sometimes kicked trash cans in the office when angry. He also commented on women’s figures, including their breasts; said that women would be happier as homemakers; and once told two female employees he would give them $5,000 if they lost 30 pounds by the end of the year, according to more than a dozen people who heard the comments and witnessed the weight-loss offer.

Mr. Fanlo said it was “patently false” that he did not respect women and that his team at SoFi had many women who received promotions and professional accolades. He also attributed his shouting and kicking of trash cans to frustration about deals and start-up pressures.

“You’re under extraordinary pressures at a company that is growing that fast,” Mr. Fanlo said.

More than two dozen former SoFi employees said they were uncomfortable with Mr. Cagney’s pursuit of women in the office. In 2012, he sent the text messages to Ms. Munoz, the executive assistant, until her colleagues took the issue up with executives and the board, according to the five people who spoke with Ms. Munoz about the matter.

Even as Mr. Cagney was texting Ms. Munoz, he also chased another young female employee. Six employees said they saw Mr. Cagney and the employee holding hands and talking intimately. One day in 2013, when Mr. Cagney was flirting with her at the office in front of colleagues, she grew enraged and left, according to three employees who witnessed the episode. Soon after, she left the company.

Around that time, SoFi’s board asked Mr. Cagney to not engage in inappropriate conduct with employees, according to two people with knowledge of the conversations. The situations were awkward in the office given that Mr. Cagney’s wife, June Ou, began working at SoFi in 2012, rising to become the company’s chief technical officer. Her desk was near Mr. Cagney’s. Ms. Ou did not respond to a request for comment.

Pushing the Business

SoFi’s business works in the following way: It loans money to students, home buyers and individuals with high credit scores. The company funds those loans with money from hedge funds and banks, who buy the loans through securities or bonds that SoFi creates.

As early as 2012, Mr. Cagney ran into trouble with some of his investors. That year, the company said it had secured $90 million in debt financing for one of its loan products, called Refi A. But some investors who had bought the securities noticed their returns were not in keeping with SoFi’s estimates and voiced concerns to executives and to a board member, according to the emails obtained by The Times.

About 10 SoFi executives met to discuss the situation; it was then that some of them learned Mr. Cagney had not actually secured the $90 million for the loan product, according to people who were at the meeting. Some attendees said they were dismayed at the possibility that they had made material misstatements to investors.

In October 2012, SoFi bought back the Refi A securities from investors for what they had paid, plus the investment return they had anticipated, or gave them the option to put their money into a different product. Mr. Cagney said in an investor letter that the product had been “imperfect,” but did not offer any details about the $90 million. The SoFi spokesman said that “no consumers were harmed in the process.”

In 2015, SoFi began offering mortgages. In meetings with the compliance officer overseeing the program, Mr. Cagney was told that SoFi was not doing enough to document the income of borrowers and was rushing to offer loans more quickly than competitors did, according to a person involved in the mortgage business. A SoFi spokesman said the company complied with all laws.

Mr. Cagney also led a push into personal loans last year. To strengthen that business, he asked customer service representatives to review and approve loans, a job that had previously been done by the company’s underwriters, said two people involved in the loan business. Many employees opposed the change because customer service representatives do not have the experience of approving loans, but the move helped SoFi double the amount of loans it issued in just a few months.

That created another problem: SoFi did not have enough money to fund all the loans it was giving out. Mr. Cagney told employees that because of the funding shortfall, it could take as long as 30 days for some new customers to get the money they borrowed. But the employees who dealt with the customers were told by a supervisor to say that people would still get the money within 72 hours as promised.

“We had to lie to them and tell them that we were a little behind or that the transfer got lost — just something to keep them off our backs,” said Marie Lombard, who worked from 2014 to 2016 at SoFi’s operations center in Healdsburg.

Mr. Cagney eventually took customer service representatives off the underwriting decisions.

A SoFi spokesman said that customer service representatives did not approve loans and that the company’s proprietary software made those decisions. He added that SoFi always communicated timing changes on its loans to borrowers and that delays have never run as high as 30 days.

An Internal Toll

Mr. Cagney’s risk-taking outside of SoFi also created problems. In January 2015, his hedge fund, Cabezon, suffered big losses on a currency trade. In the aftermath, SoFi’s board agreed to buy Cabezon for $3.25 million and give the hedge fund’s employees jobs at SoFi. That caused resentment at SoFi among some workers.

A SoFi spokesman said the company bought Mr. Cagney’s hedge fund partly because the board was concerned about Mr. Cagney’s ability to focus on both companies.

At the time, SoFi was growing rapidly. Since 2011, when it had five people in a one-room office, the company has grown to 1,200 employees and lent more than $20 billion to about 350,000 customers. Earlier this year, the private equity firm Silver Lake Partners led a new round of fund-raising that gave SoFi another $500 million and valued the company at $4.3 billion.

Mr. Cagney’s co-founders nonetheless left the company one by one, and Mr. Fanlo departed this summer. (Mr. Fanlo said that he left to pursue a new opportunity.)

In 2015, an anonymous email was sent to everyone in the company, complaining in detail about the work environment and nepotism in hiring, according to five employees who received the email. SoFi said that it takes every complaint seriously.

At the start-up’s office in Healdsburg, Yulia Zamora, who worked as an underwriter there from 2015 to 2016, said it often seemed as if there were no rules. She said she was propositioned by a supervisor numerous times.

“It was a frat house,” Ms. Zamora said. “You would find people having sex in their cars and in the parking lot. It was a free-for-all.”’

SoFi has recently been taking steps to contain the damage. Earlier this month, the company started an investigation into the harassment claims in the Healdsburg satellite office. At the same time, questions over Mr. Cagney’s own behavior also surfaced.

In recent days, Mr. Cagney canceled a trip to Singapore to attend a board meeting at SoFi’s offices in San Francisco on Monday. At the meeting, Mr. Cagney argued for his job — but eventually lost out to board members who viewed him as a liability, according to two people with knowledge of the meeting.

“I want SoFi to focus on helping members, hiring the best people, and growing our company in a way consistent with our values,” Mr. Cagney wrote in a letter announcing his departure. “That can’t happen as well as it should if people are focused on me, which isn’t fair to our members, investors, or you.”

We want to create a French Mittelstand, says Macron’s right hand man 

Emmanuel Macron’s planned economic reforms should kick-start the creation of millions of jobs and help build a business powerhouse in France to rival Germany’s famed Mittelstand, according to a close ally of the French President.

Chopping back red tape and making it easier for small companies to grow and hire staff should provide a major boost to the economy over the next 12 to 18 months, Benjamin Griveaux said on a trip to London.

“We have the small companies and we have big companies, and in between are the mid-sized firms with more than 250 workers and more than €50m turnover. We have 4,000 companies like this in France,” said the minister of state, noting that regulations intensify when small companies grow to reach this scale.

Emmanuel Macron, left, wants to boost the French economy by reforming the jobs market, which Mr Griveaux hopes will bring the number of strong mid-sized firms closer to the level in Germany Credit: Stephane Mahe/REUTERS

“Germany has 12,000, Great Britain has between 8,000 and 9,000, the same in Italy. There is no reason why France cannot reach that level.

“This is very important because this is where the jobs of tomorrow are, this is where you can have a good exportation process. Our commercial balance has been bad for a long time because our exports are weak, and we are weak because [our small firms] don’t have the proper size to do that.”

Mr Griveaux, who was one of the founding members of the President’s political party En Marche, was in the UK to meet companies and persuade them that France’s unfriendly business environment is changing.

The labour market reforms aim to make it easier for companies to fire workers, which should also embolden employers to take on workers in the first place, reducing the country’s painfully high 9.8pc rate of unemployment.

Previous administrations have struggled to make serious reforms, typically facing substantial opposition from trade unions.

Mr Griveaux dismissed the strikes as having a “low participation” level Credit: LOIC VENANCE/AFP

Mr Macron wants to push ahead with labour reforms quickly, counting on his election victory and parliamentary majority to help carry the programme through, though he has also spent the summer negotiation with unions in an effort to avoid any clash.

Talking about recent strikes and the extent of demonstrations, Mr Griveaux said: “The unions saw 100,000 people and the police saw only 20,000, so it was something in between. But there was a low participation to be honest,” adding that only one of the three main unions joined the strike.

“Why? Because there was a real round of negotiation, a strong discussion about all kinds of issues. And because I think we have political legitimacy by the vote last May, and it is easier when you have this political drive and political dynamic to implement reforms fast after the election.”

How to connect with us | Telegraph Business on social media

Bridgewater’s Ray Dalio Spreads His Gospel of ‘Radical Transparency’

As thousands of Egyptians took to the streets during the Arab Spring protests of 2011, Ray Dalio, a hedge fund billionaire, decided to sail the Nile River with some friends, including some other financiers.

It was a risky place to be, with the Middle East convulsed, and Mr. Dalio’s trip raised concerns at the Connecticut headquarters of his company, Bridgewater Associates. But his security team couldn’t get him to change his plans, so they set up a special team to track him and his group by GPS, hoping to keep him out of trouble.

You could say that Mr. Dalio was applying one of his very own rules, known internally as Principle 188: “If you make a plan, follow through!”

Over four decades, Mr. Dalio, 68, has built Bridgewater, which has $160 billion in assets, into the largest hedge fund firm in the world — bigger than the next two largest hedge funds combined. He manages money for some of the largest companies, big public pensions, sovereign wealth funds and even some central banks. He has become a financier-statesman, of sorts, consulting with political leaders in China, the Middle East and elsewhere.

He has also built an unusual and confrontational workplace at Bridgewater, where employees hold each other to account by following a strict set of rules that he created, “Principles.” He began developing the rules, which number more than 200, two decades ago based on his life experiences.

Some, like advising employees not to “tolerate badness,” are self-evident. Others — “look for people who sparkle”; “be willing to ‘shoot the people you love’” — are more unconventional.

All of the rules celebrate what Mr. Dalio calls “radical transparency” in the workplace, and the search for the ideal employee. Those ideals stand in stark contrast to Bridgewater’s reputation as particularly secretive when it come to its trading, even for an industry where secrecy about investing is the norm.

Now, Mr. Dalio hopes that others will embrace his ideas about the future of work as he embarks on a big public push to promote his Principles. But is corporate America ready for his sometimes contradictory vision of radical transparency?

On Sept. 19, Simon & Schuster will publish “Principles: Life & Work,” a 567-page book written with editing help from a former GQ magazine writer that combines Mr. Dalio’s rules with a memoir. He is also working on a smartphone app — once called the Book of the Future — to help other business leaders apply the Principles.

The effort to establish Mr. Dalio as a business icon in the vein of Steve Jobs or Warren E. Buffett comes even as questions persist about Bridgewater’s unusual culture. The firm videotapes nearly everything that goes on there for future case studies, and employees are given homework and graded on their understanding of Principles.

In interviews with nearly 50 current and former Bridgewater employees, including several chosen by Mr. Dalio, The New York Times found that he is driven to enforce his rules to ensure that they survive at the firm. Some senior executives have been taken to task in “public hangings” — one of the Principles meant to “deter bad behavior” — when they break the rules. Other employees have been pushed to tears.

The Times also found that Bridgewater’s investment process is largely a secret not only to investors but to most of the firm’s 1,500 employees. No more than a dozen people have a full sense of how the firm trades.

Even employees who left with a positive experience describe a workplace that is rigid and sometimes oppressive.

“Is it a hedge fund, or a social experiment?” said Tim Bradley, a technology consultant who worked at Bridgewater for a year in 2010.

At a time when workplace culture — whether at Silicon Valley start-ups, Wall Street banks or factories — can attract intense public scrutiny, Mr. Dalio’s pitch to other businesses that they can adopt the Bridgewater model could be a tough sell.

Mr. Dalio declined to comment for this article. In the past, he has dismissed criticism of the firm as exaggerations by disgruntled workers and “distorted news.”

Bridgewater, in a statement, said that people either thrived in the firm’s “unique culture” or “they dislike it and decide to move on.”

The Principles at Work

Nestled amid pine trees and hidden from the main road, the serene setting of Bridgewater’s headquarters in Westport, Conn., is beloved by employees. Many also find the work intellectually stimulating.

Plucked from top schools, most of those hired by the firm arrive with little or no expertise in the world of finance. They work hard, and party equally hard at off-site retreats sometimes held at the Lookout, a firm-owned guesthouse where meals are cooked by Bridgewater chefs, or at Mr. Dalio’s house in Vermont.

“Bridgewater definitely changed me and I would say for the better,” says Owen B. Jennings, who was hired as an investment associate in 2011 after graduating from Dartmouth College.

Others describe a darker side of the firm’s culture. Turnover is high — a third of employees are said to leave within the first two years, a figure the firm does not dispute. Some who have left said they became disenchanted with the constant blunt feedback, questioning of their actions, lack of privacy and need to adhere to Mr. Dalio’s rules.

Nearly all of the current and former employees interviewed declined to speak on the record for fear of retribution because of the firm’s strict nondisclosure agreements. The Times reviewed documents from a dozen lawsuits and complaints filed against the firm by former employees, and documents obtained from public agencies through Freedom of Information Act requests.

The picture that emerges is that life at Bridgewater is demanding, with a heavy focus on maintaining Mr. Dalio’s rules.

Interactive Feature | Read a Selection of Principles

Each day, employees are tested and graded on their knowledge of the Principles. They walk around with iPads loaded with the rules and an interactive rating system called “dots” to evaluate peers and supervisors. The ratings feed into each employee’s permanent record, called the “baseball card.”

Two dozen Principles “captains” are responsible for enforcing the rules. Another group, “overseers,” some of whom report to Mr. Dalio, monitor department heads.

The video cameras that record daily interactions for future case studies are so ubiquitous that employees joke about “the men in the walls.”

Meetings occasionally last for hours, sometimes simply because of a debate over why certain subjects are on the agenda or the quality of an employee’s presentation. Workers described being publicly berated for not completing homework assignments related to the firm’s culture or, sometimes, for “below-the-bar thinking.”

In one of the firm’s more memorable case studies — videotaped episodes of events at Bridgewater that employees review and analyze — a female employee burst into tears during a group interrogation. “I have never seen so many smart people in a room who never get anything done,” Mr. Bradley said.

Bridgewater said “it would be misleading to characterize” the firm as a place where employees are publicly berated.

The app that Mr. Dalio is developing will include some videotaped Bridgewater case studies but only ones that employees have agreed can be shared with the outside world.

Mr. Dalio, a devotee of Transcendental Meditation, considers confrontation part of a quest for getting to the truth and determining an employee’s “believability.” Because, as Mr. Dalio once explained in a Principle known in-house as No. 194, only “believable” people “have the right to have opinions.”

James Cordes, who was hired several years ago as an internal adviser to the Bridgewater management committee, said Mr. Dalio, “was a purist; you had to go all in.”

Mr. Dalio has talked about the firm as a place devoid of office politics, where employees don’t talk behind each other’s backs. But some former employees contend Mr. Dalio has simply created a different kind of office politics, one that rewards those who play by his rules.

The firm’s top executives, like Mr. Dalio, see things differently. “This is a deeply analytical place,” said Brian Kreiter, a member of Bridgewater’s management committee. “When something goes wrong in any part of our business it gets debated vigorously with reference to our shared understanding, systems, and principles.”

“We want this place to be an idea meritocracy,” he said.

But in Mr. Dalio’s quest to create an environment that values data, emotional intelligence can be stripped out of business decisions, said Robin Levine, a former employee who now runs a job-matching platform she and another Bridgewater alumna founded. “If you read through the Principles, there is more emphasis on the individual.” Ms. Levine added that working at Bridgewater did foster good interpersonal relationships.

Yet some incidents of raucous behavior at off-site retreats have led employees to complain.

In one 2012 episode, at Mohonk Mountain House in upstate New York, several dozen junior associates watched a fireside chat that started in humor, and then took a turn when Greg Jensen, one of Mr. Dalio’s lieutenants and a co-chief investment officer, was asked by another employee to describe the time that he and Mr. Dalio sat naked together in a sauna during a trip to Japan.

After the retreat, several employees said they were made uncomfortable by some of what had gone on that weekend, including skinny dipping and heavy drinking by some who were there.

Three years ago, another top executive took a group of young interns to a strip club. Again, some employees complained about the outing later and the episode became a case study to be discussed internally.

These incidents have spilled into public view over the past year, leading to concern about the firm’s image. The impact on recruiting has become a topic of discussion within the firm, according to an internal document reviewed by The Times. One manager wrote in the document that Bridgewater had become “a place that is difficult to hire for and lukewarm to join.”

Last year, the firm resolved a complaint filed by the National Labor Relations Board over its restrictive employment contracts.

Mark Carey, an employment lawyer who has represented five Bridgewater employees in disputes over the past two years, said that Mr. Dalio had created an environment that could deter employees from speaking up about workplace problems.

“This whole transparency and truth-seeking thing is juxtaposed with the fact that they intentionally secretize all interactions with employees from public view,” Mr. Carey said.

Mr. Dalio has acknowledged that the firm’s culture is not for everyone. Of his rules, he writes in his book, “I don’t expect you to follow them blindly.” The firm said, “While there could be some concern that media distortions might impact recruiting, the firm just had one of its best recruiting classes ever.”

Bridgewater also notes that business leaders like Bill Gates and Jamie Dimon have praised Mr. Dalio’s book.

Robert Kegan, a professor at Harvard Graduate School of Education who spent a week at Bridgewater doing research, likened Mr. Dalio to a great inventor. “Every critical thing you’ve heard about Bridgewater could be true and it still doesn’t take away from the basic project itself,” Professor Kegan said,

Mr. Dalio was contributing to “ as dramatic a transformation as the industrial revolution,” he added, referring to the Bridgewater founder’s vision of the future of work.

Investment Machine

Some hedge fund managers get museum wings named after them for making large donations. Others have hospital wards dedicated in their honor. Mr. Dalio had a species of coral — Eknomisis dalioi — named for him in 2011 because of his involvement with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.

His beginnings were more humble.

He grew up in Jackson Heights, Queens, the son of a jazz musician. He earned an undergraduate degree in accounting from Long Island University before heading off to Harvard Business School. After graduating, he landed at a small brokerage firm that was led at the time by Sanford I. Weill, who would later forge Citigroup.

Mr. Dalio didn’t last long. He punched his boss in the face and brought a stripper to a corporate event. He was fired and then formed Bridgewater in 1975, working out of his two-bedroom Manhattan apartment.

He married Barbara Gabaldoni, a descendant of the Whitneys and the Vanderbilts, and the couple moved to Wilton, Conn. For a time, Bridgewater was so small that it was run out of their home.

Early clients included the pension funds for the World Bank and Eastman Kodak. The firm gained a dedicated following on Wall Street because of its deeply researched daily economic note, Daily Observations.

After profiting on the stock market crash of 1987, Mr. Dalio started to become known beyond Wall Street. The next year, he appeared in an episode of “The Oprah Winfrey Show” called “Do foreigners own America?”

In 1991, Bridgewater started one of its flagship funds, Pure Alpha, which makes bets based on the direction of global economic trends. Five years later, it started All Weather, a fund that pioneered a steady, low-risk strategy called risk parity.

As for Principles, the concept flowed from Mr. Dalio’s early practice of jotting down his observations about how markets worked. He moved on to writing down his thoughts on how employees should interact in the workplace.

In the mid-2000s, he had just a few dozen Principles, but the number quickly grew along with Bridgewater’s head count. Ultimately, Mr. Dalio compiled his rules into a little white book. All employees carried hard copies before Principles became available on the firm’s iPads.

It wasn’t until the financial crisis of a decade ago that Bridgewater made the big leagues. The firm saw before most in the industry that trouble was brewing in the mortgage market and at investment firms like Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers. So when the stock market tumbled in 2008 and most hedge funds recorded big losses, Bridgewater’s Pure Alpha fund made for its investors. Its success led more money to pour in.

Since it began, Pure Alpha has made investors an annual average return after fees of 11.9 percent, slightly better than the 9.5 percent average yearly return for the Standard & Poor’s 500. The All Weather fund has given investors an annual return of 7.9 percent return since it began.

In an industry known for producing flameouts, the consistent returns have drawn investors to Bridgewater despite Mr. Dalio’s idiosyncratic leadership style, which has included frequent management shake-ups. Most recently, Mr. Dalio ousted Jon Rubinstein, a former top Apple executive, in March after hiring him just 10 months earlier as the firm’s co-chief executive officer, because he was not a “culture fit.”

“It is a culture that is not for everyone but not one that would dissuade me from investing,” said John Longo, a finance professor at Rutgers University School of Business.

Yet much of the firm’s vaunted investing machine remains shrouded in mystery, even to those working at Bridgewater. On Wall Street, how the firm makes its money long has been a source of envy and debate because it goes to great lengths to conceal its trades from competitors.

As one of the first hedge funds to embrace quantitative analysis, Bridgewater bases almost all of its trades on algorithms derived from decades of market observations. The firm trades in many diverse markets, including the Japanese yen, Treasury securities and gold.

There is little room at Bridgewater for intuition and fast-paced trading. Unlike their counterparts at other big hedge funds who are responsible for trade ideas, many Bridgewater traders simply press buttons that execute trades. Many of those positions are held for several months at a time.

Only a small number of top executives who occupy Mr. Dalio’s “circle of trust” have a complete picture of the firm’s trading strategy from start to finish. Another half-dozen employees on what is called Signals team, which decides how the firm should adjust its trading, sign long-term noncompete agreements.

To avoid any inadvertent leaking of trading information, Bridgewater has a general policy that discourages the 450 employees who work on the investment side of the firm from socializing with those employed at Wall Street firms it trades with.

“Not only is the information kept confidential with respect to the public at large, it is not even openly disseminated within Bridgewater,” Nella Domenici, the firm’s chief financial officer, wrote in an effort to get the Teacher Retirement System of Texas, a Bridgewater investor, to deny a public records request by The Times.

World Traveler

At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in January, Mr. Dalio appeared on a panel with two senior Russian officials: Kirill Dmitriev, the executive officer of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, and Igor Shuvalov, the first deputy prime minister of Russia. The panel came as a political firestorm was spreading in the United States over intelligence reports that Russia had meddled in the presidential elections.

“It would be better if the sanctions were lifted,” for Russia’s economic and financial development, Mr. Dalio told the audience, while adding that Russia had already made adjustments to be less dependent on foreign investment.

The message appeared to please his panelists. Mr. Dmitriev said he hoped to organize a delegation to Russia later in the year, “containing the largest funds and companies from the U.S.,” adding, “we would love to have Ray and other people there as dialogue partners.”

In his book, Mr. Dalio writes a good deal about his world travels, particularly his meetings with foreign leaders and economic thinkers. The meetings have not only informed Bridgewater’s trading style, but also have shaped Mr. Dalio’s views about how to manage his people and the firm.

But no foreign country and its leadership is as important to Mr. Dalio than China, which he first visited in 1984 and where his son Matthew lived for several years. Mr. Dalio has often met with the country’s senior leaders during his frequent visits there. In 2015, he was one of a few business leaders to attend a state dinner at the White House in honor of president Xi Jinping.

Over the years, Mr. Dalio has geared up for the day when China opens itself up more fully to foreign investment firms, securing hard-to-get licenses in order to expand its investment business.

Last year, Bridgewater became the third global investment firm to receive a license for a wholly owned foreign owned enterprise, allowing it to set up an entity to manage money for Chinese institutional investors and, potentially, to engage in foreign currency trading. The firm received the approval just weeks before China stopped issuing licenses to foreign investors.

Months later, Mr. Dalio met with Pan Gongsheng, the deputy governor of the People’s Bank of China who is also an administrator of China’s State Administration of Foreign Exchange, or SAFE, which is responsible for managing China’s foreign exchange currency reserves.

In 2014, the Dalio Foundation, an $750 million enterprise, established a separate charity in China, Beijing Dalio Public Welfare Foundation, to support child welfare, education and “social organization innovation.” As recently as 2015, the charity’s chairman was Wang Jianxi, who, according to Bloomberg data, is a vice chairman of SAFE Investments.

Bridgewater has a relationship with SAFE and the China Investment Corporation, China’s sovereign wealth fund, and has advised both government entities.

Mr. Dalio’s travels to China have continued even as he promotes himself as a management guru. A recent trip became fodder for a June meeting at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, where he told a small audience of prominent money managers — including William A. Ackman and Jim Chanos, a China bear — that the country’s economy was in safe hands with its policy makers.

And, Mr. Dalio writes in his book, one of his close counselors, not only on China, but on big ideas about the wider world, is Wang Qishan, one of the most powerful men in China and the nation’s anti-corruption czar.

Every time Mr. Dalio goes to China, he meets with Mr. Wang. The two men, Mr. Dalio writes, discuss subjects as varied as artificial intelligence and the implications of Julius Caesar’s rise to power. Mr. Dalio, who refers to Mr. Wang as one of his heroes, said that his advice had helped in the planning for Bridgewater’s future.

“Every time I speak with Mr. Wang, I feel I get closer to cracking the unifying code that unlocks the laws of the universe,” Mr. Dalio writes. Such interactions, were “thrilling to me.”

Mars counters Trump’s climate stance with $1bn sustainability plan

The organization backlash keeps growing against Jesse Trump’s withdrawal in the Paris climate accord, with Mars launching a $1bn sustainability plan as well as an M&M’s campaign centred on alternative energy.

It’s the latest climate move through the family owned firm, which become a vocal critic of america president’s decision to drag from the 2015 climate pact, saying it had been “disappointed” using the withdrawal and stressing that corporations couldn’t do it yourself if this found tackling global warming.

Mars has become moving out a $1bn (£771m) investment to assist cut green house gas emissions across its value chain by 67% by 2050, operate a poverty reduction and sustainability programme for maqui berry farmers and suppliers, and increase food security and safety efforts.

Leader Grant F Reid stated: “This plan’s about not only doing better, but doing what’s necessary. We’re carrying this out because it’s the best factor to complete but additionally because it’s good business.

“We have a much an aggressive advantage from the more resource-efficient logistics, and from making certain that everybody within our logistics does well.”

The Peanut, Twix, Milky Way and Skittles maker has additionally revealed intends to champion alternative energy through its M&M’s brand, featuring pictures of items like wind generators alongside its red and yellow chocolate figures.

Its sustainability investments and M&M’s campaign were announced in front of the United nations general set up and climate week that will run from 18 to 24 September in New You are able to.

Reid stated: “If we’re to assist deliver around the targets agreed in Paris and also the United nations sustainable development goals, there needs to be an enormous step change.

“While a lot of companies happen to be focusing on being more sustainable, the present degree of progress is nowhere close enough.Inches

The Paris agreement aims to avoid our planet from warming up by 2C since the beginning of the commercial age.

Since the earth has already warmed about 1.1C because the Industrial Revolution, the accord targeted at ensuring the brink wasn’t breached with every nation curbing heat-trapping emissions.

Basically a really few scientists say warming is because of human activity.

The main executive added: “Mars has been around business for four generations and promises to be for the following four generations.

“The best way which will happen is that if we all do things differently to make sure that the earth is good and all sorts of individuals our extended supply chains possess the chance to thrive.”

At CNN, Retracted Story Leaves an Elite Reporting Team Bruised

Late on a Monday afternoon in June, members of CNN’s elite investigations team were summoned to a fourth-floor room in the network’s glassy headquarters in Midtown Manhattan.

A top CNN executive, Terence Burke, had startling news: three of their colleagues, including the team’s executive editor, were leaving the network in the wake of a retracted article about Russia and a close ally of President Trump. Effective immediately, Mr. Burke said, the team would stop publishing stories while managers reviewed what had gone wrong.

It was a chilling moment for a unit that boasted Pulitzer Prize winners and superstar internet sleuths, and had been introduced at the beginning of the year as the vanguard of CNN’s original, high-impact reporting. Its mission statement — “Seek truth. Break news. Hold the powerful accountable.” — invoked the sort of exhaustive reporting that has become an increasingly coveted skill for news organizations in the Trump era.

But within months of its introduction, the unit, CNN Investigates, had been rocked by damaging reporting errors — including another flawed story about Mr. Trump and Russia earlier in June — and its mistakes had disturbed network executives who were already embroiled in a public feud with the White House.

The retracted story and ignominious exits of three prominent journalists was an embarrassing episode for CNN, particularly at a time when there was widespread mistrust in the media and Mr. Trump was regularly attacking the press. Two months later it remains an illuminating chapter in the network’s effort to carry out the meticulous, time-consuming work of investigative journalism within the fast-paced, ratings-driven world of 24-hour cable news.

Questions linger about the way CNN handled the publication of the story and the retraction. The network’s swift and severe response drew coverage throughout the media world, and prompted some journalists to question whether CNN had bowed to political pressure and overreacted on a story it has never explicitly said was wrong. Instead, the network maintains there had been unacceptable breakdowns in the newsroom’s internal review process.

In interviews with The New York Times, more than half a dozen CNN staff members, including three with direct knowledge of the investigative unit’s operations, provided previously unreported details about the publication of the story and the fallout from its retraction. Citing fear of retribution, the people requested anonymity to discuss sensitive internal information.

In the weeks since the story was retracted, the investigative team has been reshaped and redirected. Its members were told they should not report on perhaps the most compelling political story of the year: potential ties between the Trump administration and Russia. That subject is now largely handled by CNN’s reporting team in Washington. The political whizzes of KFile, a group of Internet-savvy reporters poached from BuzzFeed that was untainted by the retraction, were transferred out of the investigative team.

The remaining team members have resumed publishing, but with a narrower reporting scope; they now focus on topics less glamorous than Mr. Trump’s potential ties to Russia, like the opioid crisis and the environment.

Created to enhance CNN’s brand, the group had instead left it bruised, and the mistakes intensified the onslaught of attacks against CNN from Mr. Trump. Looming over the newsroom was a pending $85 billion takeover of CNN’s parent company, Time Warner, by AT&T, a deal requiring Justice Department approval that some White House aides considered a potential form of leverage against the network and its president, Jeffrey A. Zucker.

CNN said its commitment to aggressive reporting remains undiminished, and other anchors and correspondents have continued to break stories about the Trump administration and Russia. Late last month the network revealed an email from a Trump campaign aide discussing a potential meeting with the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin, during last year’s presidential race.

“For 37 years, CNN has done award winning investigative work that has led to fundamental changes at some of the country’s most important institutions,” CNN said in a statement. “This year, CNN has gone even further, devoting additional time, talent and resources to an expanded investigative team. While there have been lessons learned along the way, one thing has remained constant — our unwavering commitment to this type of work at a time when it has never been more important.”

Journalistic Glitterati

In a memo introducing the new unit in January, Andrew Morse, an executive vice president at CNN, trumpeted an expansion that he said would “supercharge” the network’s commitment to investigative journalism.

The memo envisioned a robust team of more than 25 reporters and producers that would include new hires and star correspondents gathered from other parts of the network, including Sara Ganim, a Pulitzer Prize winner for her coverage of the Penn State sexual abuse scandal.

Mr. Zucker courted A-list journalists to join the team; in April, CNN scored a coup, hiring Eric Lichtblau, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter from The New York Times.

Members of the unit initially expected to have plenty of time to report on a wide variety of stories. But, increasingly, CNN journalists said, the team was pulled into day-to-day political developments in Washington, especially the Trump campaign’s potential connections to Russia; at times, it resembled more of a rapid-response team. At the same time, the pressure to produce scoops increased.

It was in that heated environment that the first major public lapse involving the team occurred.

In early June, CNN published a bulletin saying that James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, would contradict Mr. Trump in testimony before Congress, disputing the president’s assertion that Mr. Comey had informed him three times that he was not under investigation.

The article ran under the bylines of Mr. Lichtblau; the anchors Jake Tapper and Gloria Borger; and a producer, Brian Rokus. Ms. Borger relayed the news to viewers on-air.

But the network soon began hearing from sources who said the information in the article was wrong. CNN was forced to issue a correction.

In the newsroom, some colleagues of Mr. Lichtblau, who had only recently joined the network, blamed him for the mistake; others defended him. It was a sign of the tension that already existed between CNN’s Washington bureau and the upstart investigative unit, which were jousting over the various reporting lines of the Trump-Russia story, two people said. The botched Comey story only exacerbated it.

The mistake also drew the ire of Mr. Zucker, who told his journalists that the political climate — with CNN in Mr. Trump’s cross hairs — left no room for error.

It was in this strained environment that, less than three weeks later, the investigative unit found itself at the center of a more consequential blunder.

A Flawed Process

On June 22, a modest, 950-word story appeared on CNN’s website, reporting that a Trump adviser named Anthony Scaramucci — at the time not yet a household name — had ties to a Russian investment fund that had attracted the attention of investigators in the United States Senate.

The story said that the Senate Intelligence Committee was examining the fund and that Mr. Scaramucci had met with the head of the fund, Kirill Dmitriev, several days before Mr. Trump’s inauguration. It also said the Treasury Department had been looking into the meeting at the request of two Democratic senators, who had expressed concern that Mr. Scaramucci might have promised to help get sanctions against Russia waived by the new administration.

The story was written by Thomas Frank, who had been a Pulitzer Prize finalist at USA Today. But Mr. Scaramucci, who was jockeying for a position in the White House, disputed the information when CNN contacted him for comment, according to a person close to Mr. Scaramucci; the story quoted Mr. Scaramucci as saying “there is nothing there,” in reference to his meeting with Mr. Dmitriev.

Mr. Lichtblau was editing the article and, according to the people with direct knowledge of the events, he sent a draft of the story to Lex Haris, the head of the investigative unit. Mr. Haris, who was traveling to Phoenix for a conference, signed off — as long as the story passed muster with CNN’s internal review system, known as the Triad.

The Triad includes CNN’s fact-checkers and its standards team, both of which approved the article. But the third prong, the legal department, had at least one question that went unanswered.

It is not clear what specific concerns the legal department raised, or why Mr. Lichtblau and Mr. Haris did not address them; journalists at CNN said it was sometimes difficult to keep track of the flurry of inquiries that could come during the review process. (Mr. Frank, Mr. Haris and Mr. Lichtblau declined to comment for this story.)

Mr. Lichtblau moved forward with publication. He emailed an editor affiliated with KFile, Kyle Blaine, who had not been involved in the story, and instructed him to publish it on his behalf.

When the story was posted that afternoon, it received little attention — inside the newsroom and out. But Mr. Scaramucci and his representatives quickly contacted CNN officials, including the network’s Washington bureau chief, Sam Feist, to complain. It was an “all hands on deck’’ rebuttal, said the person familiar with Mr. Scaramucci’s response.

Breitbart News, a frequent critic of CNN, soon posted an item that questioned CNN’s reporting, and called the network’s story “very fake news.’’ Citing its own source, Breitbart said there was no Senate investigation.

When CNN managers began to review the piece, they discovered the legal department’s concerns — and that they had not been addressed. They also realized a factual error had slipped through the fact-checking process; it was a technicality related to a Russian bank’s relationship to the fund, but managers found it to have been a troubling lapse.

And there was a more problematic issue, two people familiar with the review said.

Mr. Frank’s single source had wavered before the story was published, expressing concern about how the information was being presented. But Mr. Frank had not relayed that hesitancy to his colleagues.

Between Mr. Frank’s wavering source and the discovery of breakdowns in the editorial vetting process, executives concluded that the network could not stand behind the story. The day after the article was published, CNN removed it from its website and issued a formal retraction and an apology to Mr. Scaramucci.

“That story did not meet CNN’s editorial standards,” the network wrote.

Still, it is unclear to what degree the story was inaccurate. CNN has never said that the article’s reporting was incorrect, and Mr. Zucker made clear on a morning conference call, soon after the retraction, that the network would not go back and report the story again.

Some journalists inside and outside the network said privately that they believed the story was materially true. But the story also suffered from a lack of clarity. A reader could easily come away with the impression that Mr. Scaramucci himself was under investigation for some kind of illicit dealings with the Russians — an assertion that the article does not explicitly make.

Significant Consequences

The fallout came quickly. The day after the retraction, Rich Barbieri, the editor of CNN’s business and finance site, sent his team an email barring the publication of “any content involving Russia” without editorial approval — “no exceptions.”

As Breitbart News and other CNN critics gloated over the retraction, Mr. Zucker decided that stern action was necessary to demonstrate to its employees — and to the outside world — that the network would not tolerate such mistakes. The network asked Mr. Lichtblau, Mr. Haris and Mr. Frank to resign.

Eric Lichtblau won a Pulitzer Prize at The New York Times before joining CNN. Mr. Lichtblau was the editor on the retracted story.

Marilynn K. Yee / The New York Times

The episode shocked many inside CNN and created anxiety in the newsroom. Some staff members said they thought the punishment had been overly harsh, a view expressed by some media commentators as well.

Though corrections are not uncommon for news organizations, full retractions are more unusual and typically signify major factual errors or ethical breaches. When news organizations do retract a story, they normally also make an effort to correct the record, and explain to the reader what went wrong. But the brief editor’s note from CNN, some journalism experts said, provided more questions than answers.

“CNN failed in its duty to enlighten the public,” said Edward Wasserman, the dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at the University of California, Berkeley. “Instead, it muddied the waters to correct something and we don’t know what it’s correcting.”

Mr. Trump quickly seized on the resignations. He posted on Twitter the next morning, “Wow, CNN had to retract big story on ‘Russia,’ with 3 employees forced to resign. What about all the other phony stories they do? FAKE NEWS!’’

At CNN, executives took some time to regroup. Mr. Zucker vowed that the network would not be cowed by the Trump administration. After a reassessment period, CNN asked the investigative unit to resume its work. Its ranks have been replenished: new journalists have been brought on from other parts of CNN, and there is a new team leader in place, Matt Lait, a veteran former editor at The Los Angeles Times.

On Aug. 2, weeks after he informed the investigative team of the resignations, Mr. Burke, the CNN executive, convened another meeting — this time to outline the unit’s refocused mission. The team would engage in longer-term reporting on national issues, with less focus on the White House. He affirmed that the unit should leave the Russia investigation story to CNN’s staff in Washington.

Mr. Scaramucci, meanwhile, had been named Mr. Trump’s communications director. His successful tangling with CNN was said to have greatly pleased the president. Before Mr. Scaramucci was himself forced out of the White House, he was overheard on a live television microphone referring to the retracted story and Mr. Zucker.

“He helped me get the job by hitting those guys,” Mr. Scaramucci said, referring to the resignations. He added, “Tell him he’s not getting a placement fee for getting me the job.”

Trump’s rollback of ton protections risks further Houston-style calamity

In the end the furore, it’s difficult to remember since Jesse Trump’s combative press conference earlier this year was said to be about infrastructure. Holding two flowcharts, obama described how his latest executive orders would slash time it requires to obtain new structures improved which the permitting process would “go very, very quickly”.

“both sides” for that fatal clashes throughout the white-colored supremacist march in Charlottesville, Virginia.

However, although his infrastructure reforms were lost for the reason that debate, his regulatory slashing may yet possess a lengthy-term, and questionable, impact of their own.

As tropical storm Harvey spins gradually within the Gulf coast, catastrophic flooding has forced thousands using their homes in and near Houston. Along with the storm getting into Louisiana, officials only expect the amount of people whose life is upended because of it to improve.

A professional order from Trump earlier this year revoked an Obama-era directive which had established ton-risk standards for federally funded infrastructure projects built-in areas vulnerable to flooding or susceptible to the results of ocean-level rise – like a lot of individuals now sinking in Texas.

Houston already has a few of the laxest building rules for structures in potential ton zones and also the president really wants to spread that policy over the US.

“It is not sensible,Inches stated Steve Ellis, vice-president of Taxpayers for Good Sense. “Taxpayers enjoying the reassurance when they offer help a residential area to construct or rebuild, it’s done in a manner that isn’t likely to cost taxpayers money later on.Inches

Storms and flooding are usually becoming costlier and much more frequent and knowledge suggests global warming is really a leading offender.

Many towns come in seaside areas and riverine floodplains, in which the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) states “building codes are frequently inadequate in lessening damage from extreme events”. The amount of “billion-dollar events” – disasters varying from flooding to wildfires that incur greater than $1bn in damage – has risen in the last couple of decades, growing on price from the roughly $10bn five-year average in 1985 to greater than $50bn in 2015.

Obama signed executive order 13690 in 2015 as a result of rising ocean levels and surface temperatures and much more frequent storms, particularly tropical cyclones. The Obama order, using its references to ocean-level rise and global warming, grew to become an immediate target to have an administration wanting to expunge individuals terms in the political lexicon.

“That executive order was designed to help Fema pressure communities to rebuild inside a smarter, more resilient way,” stated Ellis. “This removes that pressure.”

The rules connected with 13690 hadn’t yet gone into effect if this was revoked, but several federal agencies – including Fema (the government Emergency Management Agency) and Housing and concrete Development (HUD), which funds and oversees public housing projects – had already initiated the rule-making process.

The ton standard, which amongst other things might have needed structures built inside a 100-year floodplain – a place in which a major ton statistically includes a 1% possibility of occurring in almost any given year – to become elevated by two ft to avoid ton damage, had its detractors.

The Nation’s Association of Homebuilders would be a staunch opponent from the standard, and contended more stringent rules would cut back working-class people’s use of affordable housing because of its effect upon federal property insurance programs.

Take advantage of Moore, a senior policy analyst using the Natural Sources Defense Council, countered that NAHB might have been less worried about the standard’s impacts upon private development compared to what they were concerning the limits it might put on rise in general.

“If the us government isn’t likely to offer the infrastructure that supports an improvement – roads and water treatment plants and that kind of factor – it might allow it to be impossible for development to happen,Inches he stated. “If private entities want to get in and create a ton-prone area on their own cent, that’s their prerogative, however i don’t understand why the us government should feet the balance for your.Inches

NAHB didn’t react to a request comment.

Dads and moms after Hurricane Sandy – which ravaged the brand new You are able to City metropolitan area in nov 2012 – federal, condition and municipal government departments put billions into repairs for ton-broken riding on the bus, public housing and other kinds of infrastructure. The Brand New You are able to governor, Andrew Cuomo, believed that repairs cost the condition nearly $33bn. New Jersey’s bill was near to $30bn. Without any standard in position, a lot of the government investment property on rebuilding wound up supporting projects in ton zones.

Public housing, which frequently stands upon ton-prone land which was affordable for housing government bodies to buy, is especially vulnerable. Based on HUD, greater than 11,000 public housing structures – 5% from the total – have been in ton zones. As a whole New Orleans has 1,944 structures in ton zones Miami and Jacksonville, Florida, have another 1,157, based on HUD.

“In the wake of Hurricane Sandy, numerous public venues were bumped out that might have been better protected had they underwent tighter rules,” Moore stated. “In part, this is exactly what pressed the Federal government for the reason that direction, so they could avoid getting to invest federal dollars to rebuild dangerous structures.”

Even though the Obama-era executive order continues to be revoked, there’s still an opportunity the rules it spurred could stand by themselves. Fema, HUD and also the Ecological Protection Agency (Environmental protection agency) had rules pending to apply the conventional established through the executive order, and all sorts of individuals agencies had completed public review and were waiting for final adoption from the new rules.

“It’s possible they might be adopted absent the president’s action,” Moore stated. “For Fema and HUD, it’s very important to do this, as all of the publish-Harvey rebuilding would need to be achieved up to the more protective standard.”

The effects of creating it simpler to construct in ton zones could be severe. To date 30,000 individuals are forecasted to possess been displaced by flooding from Hurricane Harvey. This is actually the third major ton in america this season, and also the third the Houston area has witnessed since March of this past year. Catastrophic flooding, whether around the coast or perhaps in the forest-hashed central plains, is really a given.

“Revoking the ton standard was an awful idea, however the president could work with lawmakers to safeguard taxpayers by requiring any rebuilding using federal funds to become created to a greater standard,” Ellis stated. “If policymakers don’t safeguard taxpayers there’s likely to be lots of waste and we’re likely to be rebuilding again after future storms.”

‘Wow, no cow’: the Swedish player using oatmeal to create milk

Adam Arnesson, 27, isn’t your usual milk producer. To begin with, he does not have any dairy cattle. Our first photo chance is in the center of certainly one of his fields of oatmeal.

Until this past year each one of these oatmeal entered animal feed, either offered or given towards the sheep, pigs and cows he rears on his organic farm in Örebro county, central Norway.

Using the support of Swedish drinks company Oatly, they are getting used to create an oat milk drink – making use of the growing marketplace for dairy alternatives across the nation.

for 14.5% of worldwide green house gas (GHG) emissions. Alongside carbon emissions from deforestation (for pasture or crops to give creatures), the animals sector can also be the only greatest human-related supply of methane (from cattle) and nitrous oxide emissions (from fertiliser and manure), two particularly potent green house gases.

On current trends, by 2050 we are growing more crops to give straight to creatures than ourselves. Even small shifts to feeding crops to humans rather of animals would result in significant increases in food availability.

One company promoting itself heavily on the rear of its tell you they are tackling this problem continues to be Oatly. It’s been causing debate – and has been the prospective of law suit from the Swedish dairy trade group – using its blunt attacks around the dairy sector and it is related climate emissions.

Ditch the cows, drink oat milk and save the earth, continues to be the gist of their marketing messaging, that has incorporated a marketing video of Chief executive officer Toni Petersson singing “Wow, no cow’ inside a field of oatmeal.

Petersson states the organization is simply “telling people exactly what the science informs us about the necessity to consume more plant-based foods”.

Adam Arnesson Arnesson’s drink was branded as “Gammeldags Hafvredryck” (Swedish for old-fashioned oat drink) due to his utilization of a less generally grown oat variety. Photograph: Tom Levitt for that Protector

The Swedish Food Agency – although it highlights the advantage of grazing creatures for creating a “rich farming landscape” in the united states – warns people against consuming a lot of milk products, because of the climate impact of methane gas emissions from cows.

However, Arnesson states many maqui berry farmers in Norway believe Oatly is demonising dairy maqui berry farmers.

“I had lots of arguments on social networking along with other maqui berry farmers, since i thought what Oatly was doing could bring better possibilities to the sector,” states Arnesson, who made the decision to make contact with the organization in 2015 to find out if they might help him switch from animals.

For Oatly, the timing was ideal. It buys its oatmeal from the wholesaler / retailer because it states it doesn’t possess the scale to mill and process itself, but saw Arnesson being an chance to show the way it may help transition maqui berry farmers from animals farming.

by researchers in the Swedish College of Farming Sciences discovered that Arnesson’s farm was producing double of calories for people to drink per hectare coupled with halved the weather impact of every calorie created.

At the moment, Arnesson admits that growing the oatmeal for milk is just viable with Oatly’s support of the guaranteed market. However with the development of the organization – it created 28m litres of oat milk in 2016 and plans to possess a capacity of 100m by 2020 – he hopes that changes soon.

“I shouldn’t take pride from getting a tractor or producing 10 tonnes of wheat or perhaps a sow with 10 piglets, however in feeding and preserving the earth – that is among the big a few things i want like a player to engage in altering,” states Arnesson.

Oatly stated it plans to utilize three more maqui berry farmers to show the ecological advantages of switching from animals to more crop production. But Arnesson states animals maqui berry farmers need government support to do so in large figures.

“Converting to growing oatmeal will not be viable for everybody and never for individuals dairy maqui berry farmers which have developed a sizable farm business. But we have to start speaking about farming in different ways. Concerning the possibilities and not simply the issues,Inches he states.