Monday, May 13, 2013

Bloomberg Reporters Were Trained To Spy On Bloomberg Terminal Subscribers

More and more criminal by the day:

Reporters at Bloomberg News were trained to use a function on the company’s financial data terminals that allowed them to view subscribers’ contact information and, in some cases, monitor login activity in order to advance news coverage, more than half a dozen former employees said. 

More than 315,000 Bloomberg subscribers worldwide use the terminals for instant market news, trading information and communication. Reporters at Bloomberg News, a separate division from the terminal business, were nonetheless told to use the terminals to get an edge in the competitive world of financial journalism where every second counts, according to these people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the company’s strict nondisclosure agreements. 

The company acknowledged that at least one reporter had gained access to information on Goldman Sachs after the bank complained to the company last month. On Sunday, Ty Trippet, a Bloomberg spokesman, said that “reporters would not have been trained to improperly use any client data.”
Matthew Winkler, editor in chief of Bloomberg News, underscored that the practice was at one time commonplace. In an editorial published on Bloomberg View late Sunday night, he said the practice of allowing reporters access to limited subscriber information dated back to the inception of the news arm of the giant financial information company founded by Michael R. Bloomberg. 

...

Bloomberg reporters also are accused of monitoring JPMorgan Chase executives’ login information last summer, when the bank suffered a multibillion-dollar trading loss, according to people briefed on the situation. The bank never formally complained to Bloomberg representatives about the practice.

The Federal Reserve and Treasury Department are also investigating whether reporters tracked employees. Bloomberg terminals sit in the highest echelons of power — including central banks, rival news organizations, Congress and even the Vatican. 

...

 
Bloomberg executives have not denied that they knew some reporters turned to the terminals to monitor when subscribers, who are mostly traders and finance executives, had logged on. On less frequent occasions, reporters also monitored chats between those subscribers and customer service representatives. Reporters could not see a subscriber’s specific securities, trades or which news articles they had read. 

Mr. Winkler did not expand on who may have been affected. He said the practices were a legacy left over from when reporters were considered part of the sales operation. Nearly 85 percent of the company’s $7.9 billion in 2012 revenue came from its terminal business. 

The news operation was assembled in the 1990s primarily as a way to sell more terminals. Reporters regularly accompanied sales representatives to sell subscribers on the wonders of the terminal, the desktop computers that provide a constant stream of headlines and data and sit upon many traders’ desks. 

The company has said the close relationship between journalists and the sales team meant there was a reason to allow reporters access to limited subscriber data to help with customer service and to customize news to subscribers’ needs. 

I have no doubt the Little Mayor and his company of criminals will get away with this.

That's what happens to companies as powerful as Bloomberg LP and people as power as Michael Bloomberg.

But it's becoming clear that everybody at Bloomberg knew this was happening - including Mike Bloomberg.

It would be nice if reporters would ask him about this pointedly at his next presser and not stop asking him until he answers.

7 comments:

  1. Questions for the Justice Department and the FBI:

    Were any civil laws broken with the unauthorized surveillance?

    Did this activity violate any wiretap laws?

    Were any criminal laws violated?

    Was the information gathered for the use of insider traders?

    How long has this unauthorized surveillance taken place?

    Who knew about this surveillance using the Bloomberg monitors?

    Is their a culture of illegal snooping taken place at Bloomberg ?

    What other unauthorized surveillance capabilities does Bloomberg news have at its disposal?

    Have any records or documents been destroyed?

    Is Bloomberg like Murdoch unfit to manage a major corporation?

    Were any financial losses incurred by those who were spied upon?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great questions - I hope you don't mind if I use them for another post I am planning on this story.

      Delete
  2. Federal Wiretap Laws prohibit the interception of voice, wire or electronic communications. There are criminal penalties for wiretapping that is not authorized by a court order. It seems that the Bloomberg employee surveillance falls within the purview of Federal wiretap laws since the Bloomberg employees were engaged in the unauthorized interception of electronic/wire data and communications.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bloomberg executives knew about this going all the way back to the beginning. There ought to be criminal penalties for them as well. Although considering this is our mayor's company and he has more money than God, I am under no illusion that that will happen.

      Delete
  3. TeachmyclassMrMayor(andyoutooMrMulgrew)May 13, 2013 at 8:29 PM

    RBE says:
    "I am under no illusion that that will happen."

    At least you are not unrealistic about things.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Experience has burned out any sense of youthful idealism I once had.

      Hard to not to be cynical these days...

      Delete
  4. TeachmyclassMrMayor(andyoutooMrMulgrew)May 13, 2013 at 9:48 PM

    See, RBE you say cynical, I say realistic.

    ReplyDelete