News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:FedEx responds to The New York Times article from Nov. 17... by drak0n1c on Monday November 18, 2019 @02:01PM (#21567071)
That framing is incredibly negative and obviously communicates it as "near zero" to the passing reader. Vague terminology of "less than projected" is the way they choose to frame it in the first sentence, and "spent even less in the next year" is the next sentence. NYT then chooses to completely omit the actual numerical figures of FedEx's investments, and instead highlights figures in the unrelated category of dividend payments (which were actually smaller than recent capital expenditures).

I'd say that paragraph you quoted showcases the misleading writing very nicely.

Re:FedEx responds to The New York Times article from Nov. 17... by morsch on Monday November 18, 2019 @02:17PM (#21567238)
I get _capital investments are going down_ from that. I don't know how you are reading _near zero_ from it. It doesn't get more "passing reader" than me in this case, I know nothing about what happened here and I have zero interest in finding out.