188jili tw
Adams has 19 as CSU Northridge defeats Denver 89-60
The New York Times turned off the comment section on the UnitedHealth CEO's op-ed after it became flooded with negative replies accusing the executive of empty promises. Andrew Witty, the CEO of UnitedHealth Group, mourned the loss of UnitedHeathCare CEO Brian Thompson in an editorial piece published by the New York Times Friday, while also offering sympathy to those frustrated with the healthcare system. LOL, NYT just disabled comments on the UnitedHealth CEO op-ed https://t.co/xxpJ7dkJY8 https://t.co/8nEw617cLR pic.twitter.com/mHJOZEJkYA But while Witty said that he was "willing to partner with anyone" to find ways to provide high-quality care at a lower cost, hundreds of readers mocked him, saying he offered no real solutions to the problem. "I have read this twice, and in essence it says nothing. What is he proposing to change or improve?" one person commented. "Tone-deaf corporate speak design to try and quell the anger of the masses; nice try," another person wrote under the op-ed. "This is the quintessential CEO statement: not a single actual idea or recommendation, and it gets released by corporate media anyways," another person said in the comments. "What a disingenuous piece," one person commented. Corporate media, a play in 3 acts pic.twitter.com/X54rIlrTQb Some users even shared their own stories, saying they had been denied claims that left them with large bills they were unable to pay. "Denying an elderly woman (my mom) gap health insurance because she has a preexisting condition - arthritis," another person commented. "That's corporate greed." "When I had UHC and my then husband needed spinal surgery UHC deemed most of it medically unnecessary and socked us with a $300k bill as our share," one user commented, adding that it took them two years to get the bill reduced. The Times turned off the comments hours after the publication of the op-ed, however the old comments are still available to read. Thompson's murder sparked a surge in social media users critiquing and discussing health insurance companies. Similar to the NYT's comment section, dozens shared stories of times where they were allegedly turned away by insurance companies. Others have joined a fanbase for Luigi Mangione, the alleged suspect in Thompson's murder, creating GoFundMes for his legal defense and boosting support for him online. Mangione has been charged with second-degree murder. Originally published by Latin Times .
African Union chairperson candidates advocate for permanent UN Security Council seatsCongress Chief Mallikarjun Kharge: ‘We do not want EVMs; we want voting on ballot paper’Butterball defends its practices after disturbing old video of turkeys goes viral
Why SiriusXM Pivoted Away From Its Streaming App
PHILADELPHIA, Nov. 26, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Nationally recognized law firm Berger Montague PC informs investors that a lawsuit was filed against Evolv Technologies Holdings, Inc. (“Evolv” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: EVLV) on behalf of purchasers of EVOLV securities between August 19, 2022 and October 30, 2024, inclusive (the “Class Period”) . Investors that suffered losses from EVOLV (NASDAQ: EVLV) investments can follow the link below for more information regarding the lawsuit: CLICK HERE to learn more about the lawsuit. Investors who purchased or acquired EVOLV securities during the Class Period may, no later than DECEMBER 31, 2024 , seek to be appointed as a lead plaintiff representative of the class. Headquartered in Waltham, MA, Evolv is a security technology company that utilizes AI-based screening designed to help create safer experiences. On October 25, 2024, Evolv announced that the Company's financial statements issued between the second quarter of 2022 and the second quarter of 2024 should not be relied upon due to material misstatements impacting revenue recognition. The Company revealed that certain sales, including sales to one of its largest channel partners, were subject to extra-contractual terms not shared with the Company's accounting personnel and that certain Evolv personnel had engaged in misconduct. The Company further announced that it had self-reported these issues to the Securities and Exchange Commission. On this news, the price of Evolv stock declined approximately 40%, from a close of $4.10 per share on October 24, 2024, to a close of $2.47 per share on October 25, 2024. On October 31, 2024, Evolv announced the termination of its CEO, Peter George, effective immediately. On this news, the price of Evolv stock declined approximately 8%, from a close of $2.34 per share on October 30, 2024, to a close of $2.15 per share on October 31, 2024. For additional information or to learn how to participate in this litigation, please contact Berger Montague: Andrew Abramowitz at aabramowitz@bm.net or (215) 875-3015, or Peter Hamner at phamner@bm.net or (215) 875-3048, or CLICK HERE . A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of all class members in directing the litigation. The lead plaintiff is usually the investor or small group of investors who have the largest financial interest and who are also adequate and typical of the proposed class of investors. The lead plaintiff selects counsel to represent the lead plaintiff and the class and these attorneys, if approved by the court, are lead or class counsel. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. Communicating with any counsel is not necessary to participate or share in any recovery achieved in this case. Any member of the purported class may move the Court to serve as a lead plaintiff through counsel of his/her choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an inactive class member. Berger Montague , with offices in Philadelphia, Minneapolis, Delaware, Washington, D.C., San Diego, San Francisco and Chicago, has been a pioneer in securities class action litigation since its founding in 1970. Berger Montague has represented individual and institutional investors for over five decades and serves as lead counsel in courts throughout the United States. Contacts: Andrew Abramowitz, Senior Counsel Berger Montague (215) 875-3015 aabramowitz@bm.net Peter Hamner Berger Montague PC (215) 875-3048 phamner@bm.netBay FC defender and cancer survivor wins NWSL's most prestigious community award for her dedication to helping others battle the disease. Share this: Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to print (Opens in new window) Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Report an error Policies and Standards Contact Us Most Popular Dear Abby: I tell them I won’t go out after 5 p.m., and still they pressure me Dear Abby: I tell them I won't go out after 5 p.m., and still they pressure me Dear Abby: She won’t marry me because of my young hiking buddy Dear Abby: She won't marry me because of my young hiking buddy Asking Eric: I saw what my teen calls me in his phone contacts Asking Eric: I saw what my teen calls me in his phone contacts Miss Manners: The old-timers insist on their strange pronunciations for streets Miss Manners: The old-timers insist on their strange pronunciations for streets Asking Eric: After the latest drama, should I just be done with my sister? Asking Eric: After the latest drama, should I just be done with my sister? Miss Manners: I don’t know what the waiter saw, but I was embarrassed Miss Manners: I don't know what the waiter saw, but I was embarrassed Harriette Cole: Nobody understands why I won’t learn to drive Harriette Cole: Nobody understands why I won't learn to drive San Jose State volleyball faces Mountain West tourney uncertainty after loss to Fresno State San Jose State volleyball faces Mountain West tourney uncertainty after loss to Fresno State Map: Tracking the storm in the Bay Area Map: Tracking the storm in the Bay Area Dear Abby: I don’t want to spend my wedding budget on shirttail in-laws Dear Abby: I don't want to spend my wedding budget on shirttail in-laws Trending Nationally Elon Musk slams Massachusetts sanctuary cities as Natick looks to join that growing group Advance Auto Parts closing all California stores School bus driver accused of abandoning 40 elementary students miles from home San Diego toddler’s backyard snake bite bills totaled more than a quarter-million dollars Alec Baldwin wasn’t invited to ‘Rust’ premiere, incites anger of slain cinematographer’s familyNone
After institutions for people with disabilities close, graves are at risk of being forgotten
Illegal border crossers sponsoring illegal border crossers? Biden admin takes heat(Bloomberg) -- A federal judge threw cold water on one of Alphabet Inc.’s key arguments in a Department of Justice lawsuit over allegations that Google monopolized advertising technology. Most Read from Bloomberg New York City’s ‘Living Breakwaters’ Brace for Stormier Seas In Kansas City, a First-Ever Stadium Designed for Women’s Sports Takes the Field NYC's Underground Steam System May Be Key to a Greener Future NYC Gets Historic Push for 80,000 Homes With $5 Billion Pledge During closing arguments in the lawsuit against the tech giant, US District Judge Leonie Brinkema said that she disagreed with Google’s attempts to rely on an earlier antitrust case involving American Express Co. The judge interrupted Google’s lawyer Monday to say that she had carefully studied a 2018 Supreme Court decision in the older case. “We’re dealing with a completely different setup” here compared to Amex, she said on the closing day of the trial in Alexandria, Virginia. The case is one of several against Google over antitrust issues. In another, the Justice Department is seeking to force Alphabet to sell off its Chrome browser after winning a landmark ruling that company illegally monopolized online search. In Monday’s case, the Justice Department and a group of states sued Google in 2023, arguing the company illegally monopolized three separate markets for advertising technology: sell-side tools used by websites, called ad servers; advertising exchanges; and buy-side tools used by advertisers known as ad networks. The company has countered by saying that splitting its tools into those buckets is wrong and its business is better understood as a single market in which website publishers and advertisers transact. Brinkema’s interjection came as Google lawyers were citing the American Express case, where the Supreme Court ruled that judges should look at how a product or service impacts different groups of customers. Google argues that some of its conduct — which the Justice Department said harmed website publishers — can be justified because it was intended to help advertisers. Brinkema said she has “problems” applying the ruling related to the credit card market to Google. But Google’s lawyer, Karen Dunn, argued that the company’s ad tech tools serve a similar function to credit cards by seeking to “match” buyers and sellers of online ads. The tools act to “facilitate transactions between buyers and sellers,” she said. You “can’t look at one side in isolation.” Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Justin Teresi, who attended Monday’s arguments, said he believes Brinkema will rule in favor of the government based on a different legal argument. “A liability finding is likely on some claims — most notably those involving the publisher ad server and tying,” said Teresi, who focuses on antitrust litigation and policy. The Justice Department argued Monday that the Amex decision only applies to credit card transaction platforms, not all markets where a company does business with two sets of customers. For example, courts haven’t held that for newspapers, which sell ads to advertisers and news to consumers. “Google is once, twice, three times a monopolist,” Justice Department lawyer Aaron Teitelbaum said. The company’s “internal documents make clear it’s three markets and not one.” Google’s Dunn said that US antitrust law allows the company to decide whether to make its products work with that of competitors. Forcing Google to provide technology and resources to make ad tech work seamlessly with rival tools would stifle innovation, she said. Brinkema, who has previously said she plans to issue a decision by the end of the year, didn’t give an update on timing. (Updates with additional details on argument beginning in eighth paragraph.) Most Read from Bloomberg Businessweek What Happens When US Hospitals Go Big on Nurse Practitioners Why the Flying Experience Feels So Much Worse The Charm Bracelet Shop That Keeps Going Viral Clear’s Dominance in Airports Could Be Coming to an End An Airline’s Florida Resort Dreams Look More Like a Nightmare ©2024 Bloomberg L.P.