>>andsoi+(OP)
The contrast between the media's depiction of today's events with this outcome demonstrates how much Sam and his aligned interests can influence a narrative. The vast majority of reporting indicated that Sam held all the leverage, the board members were about to be fired, and a new board would be appointed which would be much better aligned with Sam. These accounts took special care to portray the current board as inept, wavering, and eager to backtrack. However, the reality appears to be that the board was steadfast in their decision and focused on moving forward in search of a new CEO. The truth is, we still don't know the real reason why Sam was ousted. His removal may be justified and it may not. But in the absence of information, media speculation was overwhelmingly biased in Sam's interests. If the news that the board did not immediately backtrack and capitulate to Sam's demands seems to be coming out of left field, you've likely fallen victim to this narrative. Chances are the board is not as incompetent as you were led to believe, and any judgement of their competence should be reserved until further details are provided on the reasons for Sam's removal.