The Toronto Star's David Olive, a long-time critic of Black, on why Conrad doesn't deserve much sympathy.
As a wunderkind tycoon in the 1970s, Black outwitted two widows to seize control of one of Canada's greatest conglomerates, Argus Corp. After promising to build on Argus's earlier triumphs, Black instead dismantled that creaking empire, which saw him preside over the collapse of Massey-Ferguson Ltd., which once ruled the British Empire market in farm equipment; and the rapid decline of the venerable Dominion Stores Ltd.
That first debacle revealed the suspect business acumen of Black and his "associates." (Black has always described his fellow executives that way, as if they were engaged in law, medicine or some other calling more distinguished than grubby commerce.) It also left behind a sizeable population of aggrieved minority shareholders and laid-off employees who claimed theft of their pensions (an accusation not proved in any court).
The minority investors couldn't help noticing that Black's financial engineering – his countless reorganizations of a daisy chain of companies – generally found Black and his associates further enriched while other investors suffered buyer's remorse.
On Black's foray into newspapers:
Black misled the Daily Telegraph's Berry family into thinking they would have a continued role in a paper from which he planned to evict them, as he would later erase what remained of the Southam influence from their dominant papers in Montreal, Ottawa, Calgary and Vancouver.
On Black's contribution to journalism:
It's often said these days that, for all his faults, Black at least lifted the quality of Canadian journalism, notably with his launch of the National Post. That's bunk.
Black's principal legacy is "libel chill." For decades he used libel writs, usually delivered by top "associate" Peter Atkinson – also found guilty of fraud yesterday – to neuter coverage of his activities.
Rather than risk the enormous aggravation of dealing with Atkinson's imperious accusations of defamation, reporters and editors across the land engaged in the longest period of self-censorship ever afforded a public figure. None of Black's libel actions was ever tested in a courtroom; timorous media outlets chose not to call his bluff.
Prospective investors in Hollinger International had difficulty learning, therefore, that the future Lord Black of Crossharbour was chronically given to doing one thing and saying another. The final irony in this regard is that Black laid bare many of his least attractive business methods in his own 1993 memoir, Conrad Black: A Life in Progress (Key Porter) ...
Olive brought up some other stuff that shows Friday's verdict is just the final act in a long-term drama:
The assault on Black's credibility began in a Delaware courtroom in an unrelated 2004 dispute, in which Vice Chancellor Leo Strine, one of America's top corporate jurists, found Black's testimony to lack "the ring of truth."
And Richard Breeden, a former SEC chair recruited by Hollinger International to examine the firm's Black-era compensation practices, issued a report accusing Black and associates of operating the firm as a "corporate kleptocracy," diverting some $400 million (U.S.), or 95 per cent of Hollinger International's adjusted net income between 1997 to 2003, to themselves and holding companies controlled by Black.
As for Black crafting a post-conviction legacy:
For Black, there's still time to expand a written oeuvre that might someday overshadow a business career that can be charitably described as checkered. But only if Black devotes himself wholly to that ennobling legacy, and acknowledges that in crossing the line once or twice too often, he might just deserve the harsh fate dealt him yesterday.