As an editorial in the Wall Street Journal by our own Jim Copland notes, the ballot advice of the profitable—and government-privileged—Institutional Shareholder Services often clashes with the desires of the average diversified investor.
"Politicized Proxy Advisers vs. Individual Investors"
Related Entries:
- Shareholder activism: James Copland on 'This Week in the Boardroom'
- CLP Director James Copland in the Washington Examiner
- New Podcast: Season-end report for the 2012 proxy season
- The increasing influence of activist shareholders
- Manhattan Institute releases its Season-End Report for the 2012 Proxy Season
- James Copland: Don't believe the hype about corporate political spending
- U.K. Parliament expected to adopt binding 'say on pay' votes
- The underreported cost of proxy battles
- New Report: Claim that corporate political speech hurts shareholders is false
- Are binding "say on pay" votes coming to the U.K.?
- Former SEC commissioner Paul Atkins on shareholder activism and corporate political speech
- WSJ cites Proxy Monitor project: 'Shareholders are rejecting efforts to limit political speech'
- Union and activist tactic to supress corporate speech proves ineffective
- Shareholder activism: James Copland on This Week in the Boardroom
![]() |
| Isaac Gorodetski Project Manager, Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute igorodetski@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
| Laura Eyi Press Officer, Manhattan Institute leyi@manhattan-institute.org |




Leave a comment
Once submitted, the comment will first be reviewed by our editors and is not guaranteed to be published. Point of Law editors reserve the right to edit, delete, move, or mark as spam any and all comments. They also have the right to block access to any one or group from commenting or from the entire blog. A comment which does not add to the conversation, runs of on an inappropriate tangent, or kills the conversation may be edited, moved, or deleted.
The views and opinions of those providing comments are those of the author of the comment alone, and even if allowed onto the site do not reflect the opinions of Point of Law bloggers or the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research or any employee thereof. Comments submitted to Point of Law are the sole responsibility of their authors, and the author will take full responsibility for the comment, including any asserted liability for defamation or any other cause of action, and neither the Manhattan Institute nor its insurance carriers will assume responsibility for the comment merely because the Institute has provided the forum for its posting.