« Bruce gets the last laugh | Main | Yvette Clarke to Ratner: Reject Barclays »
February 9, 2007
Slavery? Apartheid? Barclays deal is wrong for other reasons
This week, blogger Stuart Schrader headlines The Brooklyn Paper's Letters section with his take on the Barclay's scandal:
A sounder — though less-sensational — argument against the [Barclays Bank naming-rights] deal is this: using the arena to advertise this bank is contrary to the economic reality of most Brooklynites. Ordinary folk simply have no reason to care about Barclays’ boast that in 2006, it was named “Inflation Derivatives house of the year, Commodity Derivatives house of the year, and Currency Derivatives house of the year by Risk magazine.” Say what?
Forest City Ratner garnered support of many low-income African-Americans for its mega-development by promising jobs and housing. Yet by selling the naming rights to a foreign investment bank with nary a U.S. consumer branch, FCR has shown its true colors.
Suddenly, the project is revealed to be less about the poor kids who will grow up in its shadow (literally), and much more about unfathomably rich investors
Schrader goes into more detail about the gobal implications of the controversial deal on his blog, Picketing Henry Ford.
Posted by lumi at February 9, 2007 12:00 PM