150 years ago
the business corporation
was a relatively
insignificant institution.
Today it is all pervasive.
Like the church
the monarchy
and the communist party
in other times and places
the corporation is today's
dominant institution.
This documentary
examines the nature
evolution impacts and
possible futures
of the modern
business corporation.
Initially given a narrow
legal mandate
what has allowed today's
corporation to achieve
such extraordinary power
and influence over our lives?
We begin our inquiry as
scandals threaten to trigger
a wide debate about the lack
of public control
over big corporations.
I think there is an overhang
over the market of distrust.
Listen 95 percent
or some percent
huge percentage
of the business
community are honest
and unreveal
all their assets
got compensation
programs that are balanced.
But there are
some bad apples...
the media debate about
the basic operating principles
of the corporate world
was quickly reduced
to a game of
follow the leader.
I still happen to think
the United States
is the greatest place
in the world to invest.
We have some shake ups
that are going on
because of a few
bad apples.
Some people call me
a bad apple
but I may be bruised
but I still taste sweet.
Some people call me
a bad apple
but I may be the sweetest
apple on the tree.
These are not just
a bunch of bad apples.
This is just
a few bad apples.
This is not just
a few bad apples.
You've gotta get rid
of the bad apples
You can start
with Tyco
Bad apples
We know all
about WorldCom.
Bad apples
Xerox Corporation.
Bad apples
Arthur Anderson.
Bad apples
Enron obviously
bad apples.
K- mart Corporation
Bad apples
the fruit cart is
getting a little more full.
I don't think it's just a
few apples unfortunately.
I think this is the worst
crisis of confidence
in business.
What's wrong
with this picture?
Can we not pick
a better metaphor
to describe the dominant
institution of our time?
Through the voices of CEOs
whistle blowers
brokers gurus and spies
insiders and outsiders
we present the corporation
as a paradox
an institution which
creates great wealth
but causes enormous
and often hidden harms.
I see the corporation
as part of a jigsaw
in society as a whole
which if you remove it
the picture's incomplete.
But equally if it's
the only part
it's not going to work.
A sports team.
Some of us are
blocking and tackling.
Some of us
are running the ball
some of us are
throwing the ball.
But we all have
a common purpose
which is to succeed
as an organization.
A corporations
like a family unit.
People in a corporation work
together for a common end
Like the telephone system
it reaches almost
everywhere.
It's extraordinarily powerful
it's pretty hard to avoid.
And it transforms
the lives of people
I think on balance
for the better.
The eagle
soaring clear eyed
competitive
prepared to strike
but not a vulture.
Noble visionary majestic
that people can believe in
and be inspired by
that creates such
a lift that it soars.
I can see that being
a good logo
for the principled
company.
Okay guys
enough bullshit.
Corporations are
artificial creations.
You might say
they're monsters
trying to devour as much
profit as possible
at anyone's expense.
I think of a whale.
A gentle big fish
which could swallow you
in an instant.
Dr. Frankenstein's creation
has overwhelmed and
overpowered him.
As the corporate form
has done with us.
The word corporate gets
attached in almost
you know in a
pejorative sense to
and gets married
with the word agenda.
And one hears a lot about
the corporate agenda
as though it is evil
as though it is an agenda
which is trying
to take over the world.
Personally I don't
use the word "corporation"
I use the word business.
I will use the word
use the word company.
I will use the words
business community
cause I think that is a much
fairer representation
than zeroing in on just
this word corporation.
It's funny that I've taught
in a business school
for as long as I have
without ever having
been asked so pointedly
to say what I think
a corporation is.
...it is one form of
business ownership...?
It's a group of individuals
working together to serve
a variety of objectives.
The principal one
of which is earning large
growing sustained
legal returns
for the people who
own the business.
The modern corporation has
grown out of the industrial age.
The industrial age
began in 1712
with an Englishman named
Thomas Newcomen
invented a steam driven
pump to pump water
out of the English coalmine
so the English coalminers
could get more
coal to mine
rather than hauling
buckets of water
out of the mine
It was all about productivity
more coal per man hour.
That was the dawn of
the industrial age.
And then it became more
steel per man hour
more textiles
per man hour
more automobiles
per man hour
and today it's more
chips per man hour
more gizmos per man hour.
The system is basically
the same system
producing more
sophisticated products today.
The dominant role of
corporations in our lives
is essentially a product of
roughly the past century.
Corporations were originally
associations of people
who were chartered
by a state
to perform some
particular function.
Like a group of people
want to build abridge
over the Charles River
or something like that.
There were very few
chartered corporations
in early United
States history.
And the ones that existed
had clear stipulations
in their state
issued charters
how long they
could operate
the amount of
capitalization
what they made or did
or maintained
a turnpike whatever was
in their charter
and they didn't
do anything else.
They didn't own or couldn't
own another corporation.
Their shareholders
were liable.
And so on.
In both law and the culture
the corporation was considered
a subordinate entity that was
a gift from the people
in order to serve
the public good.
So you have that history
and we shouldn't
be misled by it
it's not as if these
were the halcyon days
when all corporations
served the public trust
but there's a lot
to learn from that.
The Civil War and the
Industrial Revolution
created enormous growth
in corporations.
And so there was an explosion
of railroads
who got large federal
subsidies of land.
Banking heavily
manufacturing
And corporate lawyers
a century and a half ago
realized that they needed
more power to operate
And wanted to remove some
of the constraints
that had historically been
placed on the corporate form.
The 14th amendment
was passed
at the end of the Civil War
to give equal rights
to black people.
And therefore it said
No state can deprive
any person of life
liberty or property
without due process of law.
And that was intended
to prevent the states
from taking away life
liberty or property
from black people
as they had done
for so much of
our history.
And what happens is the
corporations come into court
and corporation lawyers
are very clever.
And they say
Oh you cant deprive
a person of life
liberty or property.
We are a person.
A corporation is a person.
And so supreme court
goes along with that.
And what was particularly
grotesque about this was
that the 14th amendment
was passed
to protect newly
freed slaves.
So for instance
between 1890 and 1910
there were 307 cases brought
before the court
under the 14th amendment.
288 of these brought
by corporations
19 by African Americans.
600000 people were killed
to get rights for people
and then with strokes of
the pen over the next 30 years
judges applied those rights
to capital and property
while stripping them
from people.
Everybody makes a mistake
once in a while
but I just cant be
personally responsible.
That's one of the weaknesses
of a partnership
isn't it Sid?
Well maybe you'd better
incorporate the store.
Incorporate?!
Yes
Incorporating would give you
the big advantage of
what you want right now
limited liability.
You start with a
group of people
who wanna invest their
money in accompany.
Then these people apply for
a charter as a corporation.
This government issues a
charter to that corporation.
Now that corporation operates
legally as an individual person
it is not a group of people
it is under the law
a legal person.
Imperial Steel Incorporated
has many of the legal rights
of a person.
It can buy and
sell property...
It can borrow money.
It can sue in court
and be sued.
It can carry
on a business.
Imperial Steel
along with thousands
of other legal persons
is a part of our
daily living.
It is a member
of our society.
Having acquired the legal rights
and protections of a person
the question arises
What kind of person
is the corporation?
Corporations were given
the rights of immortal persons.
But then special
kinds of persons
persons who had no
moral conscience.
These are a special
kind of persons
which are designed by law
to be concerned
only for their
stockholders.
And not say what
are sometimes
called their stakeholders
like the community or the
work force or whatever.
The great problems of having
corporate citizens
is that they aren't
like the rest of us.
As Baron Thurlow in England
is supposed to have said
They have no soul to save
and they have no body
to incarcerate.
I believe the mistake that
a lot of people make
when they think
about corporations
is they think you know
corporations are like us.
General Electric is a kind
old man with lots of stories.
Nike young energetic.
Microsoft aggressive
McDonald's young
outgoing enthusiastic
Monsanto immaculately dressed
Disney goofy.
The Body Shop
um deceptive
very lovely.
Do you know what the
body shop is?
Nope.
They have feelings
they have politics
they have belief systems
they really only
have one thing
the bottom line
How to make as much
money as they can
in any given quarter.
That's it.
Of course they
make a profit
and it's a good thing.
That's the incentive that
makes capitalism work.
To give us more
of the things that wanted.
That's the incentive that
other economic systems lack.
People accuse
us of only paying attention
to the economic leg
because they think
that's what a business
persons mind set is
it's just money.
And it's not so
because we as
business people
know that wanted to certainly
address the environment
but also wanted to be seen as
constructive members
of society.
There are companies that do
good for the communities.
They produce
services and goods
that are of value to all of us
that make our
lives better
and that's a good thing.
The problem comes in in
the profit motivation here
because these people
there's no such
thing as enough.
And I always
counterpoint out
there's no organization
on this planet
that can neglect
its economic foundation.
Even someone living under
a banyan tree is dependent
on support from someone.
Economic leg has to be
addressed by everyone.
It's not just
a business issue.
But unlike someone
under a banyan tree
all publicly
traded corporations
has been structured
through a series
of legal decisions
to have a peculiar and
disturbing characteristic.
They are required
by law
to place the financial
interests of their owners
above competing interests.
In fact the corporation
is legally bound
to put its bottom line
ahead of everything else
even the public good.
That's not
a law of nature
that's a very
specific decision.
In fact
a judicial decision.
So they're concerned only
for the short term profit
of their stockholders who are
very highly concentrated.
To whom do these
companies owe loyalty?
What does loyalty mean?
Well it turns
out that
that was a rather
naive concept anyways
as corporations are
always owed obligation
to themselves to get large
and to get profitable.
In doing this
it tends to be more
profitable to the extent
it can make other
people pay for the bills
for its impact
on society.
There's a terrible word that
economists use for this
called externalities.
An externality is the effect
of a transaction
between two individuals.
Third party who
has not consented to
or played any role
in the carrying out
of that transaction
And there are real
problems in that area.
There's no
doubt about it.
Running a business is
a tough proposition.
There are costs to be
minimized at every turn
and at some point
the corporation says
you know let somebody
else deal with that.
Let's let somebody else
supply the military power
to the middle east to protect
the oil at its source.
Let's let somebody else build
the roads that we can drive
these automobiles on.
Let's let somebody
else have those problems
And that is where
externalities come from
that notion of let somebody
else deal with that.
I got all I can
handle myself.
A corporation is an
externalizing machine
in the same way that a shark
is a killing machine.
Each one is designed
in a very efficient way
to accomplish
particular objectives.
In the achievement
of those objectives
there isn't any question
of malevolence or of will.
The enterprise
has within it
and the shark
has within it
those characteristics that
enable it to do that
for which it was designed.
The pressure is
on the corporation
to deliver results now
and to externalize
any cost
that this unwary
or uncaring public
will allow it
to eternalize.
To determine the kind
of personality
that drives the corporation
to behave like
an externalizing machine
we can analyze it
like a psychiatrist
would a patient.
We can even formulate
a diagnosis
on the basis of typical
case histories of harm
that is inflicted
on others
selected from a universe
of corporate activity.
Well this is the office
of the national
labour committee
here in the garment area
of New York City.
It's a little
bit dishevelled.
These are all from
different campaigns.
To make this stuff
concrete as possible
we purchased all of
the products from the factories
that we're talking about.
This shirt sells
for $14.99.
And the women who made
this shirt got paid $0.03.
Liz Claiborne jackets
made in El Salvador
The jackets are $178
and the workers were
paid $0.74
for every jacket they made.
Alpine car stereos
$0.31 an hour.
It's not just sneakers.
It's not just apparel.
It's everything.
We were in Honduras
and some workers they knew
what kind of work we did
and they approached
us and said
conditions in our
factory are horrible.
Will you please
meet with us.
And we said we would.
But you cant meet in
the developing world
you cant walk up in
a factory with your notebook
and workers come
up and interview them.
I mean there's
goons there's spies
the military police
so you do everything
in a clandestine manner.
We are about
to start the meeting
and in walk three guys
very tough looking guys.
The company had found
out about our meeting
and sent these spies.
Obviously we didn't
have the meeting.
But these young girls
were really bright
And as they
were leaving
away from the eyesight
of the spies
they started to put their hands
underneath the table.
And I put my hand
under there
and they put into my hand
their pay stubs.
So wed know
who they were
what they were paid
and the labels that
they made in the factory
so wed know who
they worked for.
So I took my hand
after everyone had left.
And in the palm
of my hand
was the face was of
Kathy Lee Gifford
And on the bottom
of it was
A portion of the proceeds
from the sale of this garment
would be donated to various
children's charities.
Very touching
gets you right here.
Wal-Mart is telling you
if you purchase these pants
and Kathy Lee
is telling you
if you purchase
these pants
you will be
helping children.
The problem was
the people that
handed us this label
were 13 years of age.
Do many people
in your family work here?
Just me.
How many people
do you support?
Eight people?
And how do you do it with
that salary is it enough?
No.
Let's look at it from
a different point of view
Let's look at it
from a point of view
of the people in Bangladesh
who are starving to death.
The people in China
who are starving to death
and the only thing that they
have to offer to anybody
that is worth anything
is their low
cost labour.
And in effect what
they're saying to the world
is they have this big
flag that says
Come over and hire us.
We will work
for $0.10 an hour.
Because $0.10 an hour
will buy us the rice
that's wanted not
to starve.
And come and rescue us
from our circumstance.
And so when Nike comes in
they are regarded by
everybody in the community
as an enormous godsend.
Hey wait!
You are not
permitted to be here!
The door was wide open.
No no no no no.
That's my clothes.
Those are my clothes.
This is not your clothes.
Why your camera!?
Don't touch the woman.
Why!?
This is a private company.
Without permission
how can you come here?
Yes well the door
was wide open
The doors
for employees
not for you.
We went through
the garbage dump
in the Dominican
Republic.
We always do this
kind of stuff
we dig around.
One day we found
a big pile
of Nikes internal
pricing documents.
Nike assigns a time
frame to each operation.
They don't talk
about minutes.
They break the timeframe into
ten thousandths of a second.
You get to the bottom
of all 22 operations;
they give the workers 6.6
minutes to make the shirt.
It's $0.70 an hour
in the Dominican Republic.
That's 6.6 minutes
equals $0.08.
These are Nikes documents.
That means the wages come to
three tenths of one percent
of the retail price.
This is the reality.
It's the science
of exploitation.
What happens in the areas
where these corporations
go in and are successful?
They soon find that they cant
do anymore in that country
because the wages
are too high now.
And what's that another
way of saying
well the people are
no longer desperate.
So okay we've used up
all the desperate people there
they're all plump and
healthy and wealthy.
Let's move on to the next
desperate lot and employ them
and raise their level up.
Well the whole idea of
the export processing zone
is that it will be the
first step towards
this wonderful
new development
through the investment that's
attracted to these countries
there will be
a trickle down effect
into the communities.
But because so many countries
are now in the game
of creating these
free trade enclaves
they have to keep providing
more and more incentives
for companies to come to their
little denationalized pocket.
And the tax holidays
get longer.
So the workers rarely
make enough money
to buy
three meals a days
let alone feed
their local economy.
Something happened in 1940
which marked the beginning
of a new era.
The era of the ability
to synthesize and create.
On an unlimited scale
new chemicals that had
never existed before
in the world.
And using the
magic of research
oil companies compete
with each other
in taking the petroleum
molecule apart
and rearranging it into
well you name it...
So suddenly it became possible
to produce any new chemical
synthetic chemicals
the likes of which had never
existed before in the world
for any purpose and
at virtually no cost.
Fabrics toot brushes
tires insecticides
cosmetics weed killers.
A whole galaxy of things to
make a better life on earth.
For instance if you wanted
to go to a chemist and say
look I want to have
a chemical say a pesticide
which will persist
throughout the food chain
and I don't want to have
to renew it very very often
Id like it to be
relatively non-destructible
and then he'd put two
benzene molecules
on the blackboard and
add a chlorine here
and a chlorine there
that was DDT!
When the eighth army needed
Jap civilians to help them out
in our occupation
they called on native
doctors to administer DD under the supervision
of our men
to stand a potential
typhus epidemic.
Dusting like this goes a long
way in checking disease
and the laughs on them.
"Pardon our dust"
As the petrochemical
era grew and grew
warning signs emerged that
some of these chemicals
could pose hazards.
The data initially were
trivial anecdotal
but gradually a body of data
started accumulating
to the extent that we now know
that the synthetic chemicals
which have permeated
our workplace
our consumer products
our air our water
produced cancer
and also birth defects
and some other
toxic effects.
Furthermore industry
has known about this
at least most industries
have known about this
and have attempted
to trivialize these risks.
If I take a gun and shoot
you that's criminal.
If I expose you
to some chemicals
which knowingly are
going to kill you
what difference is there?
The difference is that it
takes longer to kill you.
We are now in the midst
of a major cancer epidemic
and I have no doubt
and I have documented
the basis for this
that industry is
largely responsible
for this overwhelming
epidemic of cancer
in which one in every two men
get cancer in their lifetimes
and one in every three
women get cancer.
Towards the end
of 1989
a great box of documents
arrived at my office
without any indication
where they came from.
And I opened them
and found in it a complete
set of Monsanto files
dealing with toxicological
testing of cows
who'd been given RBGH.
BST trade name Posilac is
being used in more than
a quarter of the dairy herds
in the United States
according to Monsanto.
The milk is being drunk
by a large portion
of the American population
since the food and drug
administration declared it safe
for both cows and humans...
And at that the
Monsanto was saying
There's no
evidence whatsoever
of any adverse affects
We don't use antibiotics.
And this clearly showed
that they had lied
through their teeth.
The files described areas
of chronic inflammation
in the heart lungs
kidneys spleen
also reproductive effects
also a whole series
of other problems.
...the most comprehensive
independent assessment of the drug
"concludes that bust
results in un necessary pain
suffering and
distress for the cows.
This is not acceptable
for a drug designed simply
to increase milk production...
It is a silly product.
We have the industrial
world is a wash in milk.
We're over producing milk.
We actually have governments
around the world
who pay farmers not
to produce milk.
So the first product
Monsanto comes up with
is a product that produces
more of what we don't need.
Of course you'll want to inject
Posilac in every eligible cow
as each cow is not treated
is a lost income opportunity.
But the problem was
that use of
the artificial hormone
caused all sorts of
problems for the cows.
It caused something
called mastitis
which is a very painful
infection of the udders.
When you milk the cow
if the cow
has bad mastitis
some of the
and I don't know how to
say this in a you know
I hope people aren't
watching at dinnertime
but the pus from the
infection of the udders
ends up in the milk.
And the somatic cell
count they call it
the bacteria count
inside your
milk goes up.
There's accost to the cows.
The cows get sicker when
they're injected with RBGH.
They're injected
with antibiotics.
We know that people are
consuming antibiotics
through their food
and we know that
that's contributing
to antibiotic resistant
bacteria and diseases.
And we know we're at a
crisis when somebody can go
into a hospital and
get a staff infection
and it cant be
cured and they die.
That's a crisis.
Bad for the cow
Bad for the farmer
Bad potentially
for the consumer
The jury is out
we see a lot of
conflicting evidence
about potential
health risk.
And of course
as a consumer
my belief is why
should I take any risk?
Factory farm cows have not
been the only victims
of Monsanto products.
Large areas of Vietnam were
deforested by the us military
using Monsanto's agent orange.
The toxic herbicide
reportedly caused
over 50000 birth defects
and hundreds of thousands of cancers
in Vietnamese civilians and soldiers
and in former American troops
serving in South East Asia.
Unlike the Vietnamese victims
U.S. Vietnam war veterans
exposed to Agent Orange
were able to sue Monsanto
for causing their illnesses.
Monsanto settled
out of court
paying $80 million
in damages.
But it never
admitted guilt
Sleeping in a motel
in Brewer Maine one night
I woke up with
terrible hay fever
and my eyes were burning.
And I looked out
at the river
and there were great
mounds of white foam
going right
down the river.
And the next morning
I got up and I said
My God what was
that happening last night
He said "Oh that's
just the river".
And I said
"what do you mean?"
He said "Well look every
night the paper company sends
the stuff down the river."
And I said "What are
you talking about?"
And he said "Don't
you understand?"
"That show we get rid of the
effluent from the paper mills."
Well I knew at that time
I had been in the business.
I had sold oil
to the paper mills.
I knew all the owners.
I had been in politics.
I knew the people
in the towns.
I knew not one constituent
of the paper mills
wanted to have
the river polluted.
And yet here the river
was being polluted.
And it was more or less as
if we created a doom machine.
In our search for wealth
and for prosperity
we created something that's
going to destroy us.
The traders who are
involved in the market
are not guys
who are
whose moral fibre
when it comes to
environmental conditions
are going to be
rattled at all
They're seeing dollars
and they're making money.
Brokers don't stay away
from copper
because it violates
their religious beliefs
or your environmental
policies.
No.
There are times
when you think about it
but it's fleeting.
It really is
a fleeting moment.
It's like yeah
oh yeah yeah
well a town is being
polluted down there in Peru
but hey this guy
needs to buy some copper.
Im getting paid
a commission too.
Our information that we receive
does not include anything
about the environmental
conditions
because until
the environmental conditions
become a commodity
themselves or are being traded
then obviously we will not
have anything to do with that.
It doesn't come into
our psyche at all.
It's so far away and
it's you hardly hear
anything about it.
I mean keep in mind there are
things going on right in our
backyards for god sake.
We trade live hogs.
I mean there are so many pigs
in the state of Carolina
and they're
polluting the rivers
but how often do you
find out about that?
At Multinational Monitor
we've put together a list
of the top corporate
criminals of the 1990s.
We went back and looked at
all the criminal fines that
corporations had
paid in the decade.
Exxon pled guilty in connection
to federal criminal charges
with the Valdez spill and paid
$125 million in criminal fines.
General Electric
was guilty of defrauding
the federal government
and paid $9.5 million
in criminal fines.
Chevron was guilty of
environmental violations
and paid $6.5 million
in fines.
Mitsubishi was guilty
of anti-trust violations
and paid $1.8 million in fines.
IBM was guilty of
illegal exports and paid.
Eastman Kodak was guilty of
environmental violations.
Pfizer the drug manufacturer
was guilty of
antitrust violations.
Odwalla was guilty of food and
drug regulatory violations.
Sears was guilty of...
Damon Clinical Laboratories
was guilty of...
Blue Cross Blue
Shield was guilty of
Again and again we have
the problem
that whether you obey
the law or not
is a matter whether
its cost effective.
If the chance
of getting caught
and the penalties are less
than it costs to comply
people think of it as
just a business decision.
Drawing the metaphor of
the early attempts to fly.
Theban going off of a very
high cliff in his airplane
with the wings flapping
and the guys
flapping the wings
and the wind
is in his face
and this poor fool
think she's flying
but in fact
he's in freefall
and he just doesn't
know it yet
because the ground
is so far away
but of course the craft
is doomed to crash.
That's the way our
civilization is
the very high cliff
represents the virtually
united resources
we seem to have when
we began this journey.
The craft isn't flying
because it's not built according
to the laws of aerodynamics
and is subject
to the law of gravity.
Civilization is not flying
because it's not built according
to the laws of aerodynamics
for civilizations
that would fly.
And of course the ground
is still a long way away
but some people have seen
that ground rushing up
sooner than
the rest of us have.
The visionaries have seen it
and have told us its coming.
There's not a
single scientific
peer reviewed paper published
in the last 25 years
that would contradict
this scenario
Every living system
of earth
is in decline
every life support system
of earth is in decline
and these together
constitute the biosphere
the biosphere that supports
and nurtures all of life
not just our life but perhaps
30 million other species
that share
this planet with us.
The typical company
of the 20th century
extractive wasteful
abusive linear
in all of its processes
taking from the earth
making wasting
sending its products
back to the biosphere
waste to a landfill...
I myself was amazed to learn
just how much stuff
the earth has to produce
through our extraction process
to produce a dollar of
revenue for our company.
When I learnt
I was flabbergasted.
We are leaving a terrible
legacy of poison
and diminishment
of the environment
for our grandchildren's
grandchildren
generations not yet born.
Some people have called that
intergeneration tyranny
a form of taxation
without representation
levied by us
on generations yet to be.
It's the wrong
thing to do.
One of the questions
that comes up periodically
is to what extent could
corporation be considered
to be psychopathic.
And if we look at a corporation
as a legal person
that it may not be that
difficult to actually draw
the transition between
psychopathy in the individual
to psychopathy
in a corporation.
We could go through
the characteristics
that define this particular
disorder one by one
and see how they might
apply to corporations.
They would have all
the characteristics
and in fact
in many respects
the corporation
of that sort
is the proto typical
of a psychopath.
If the dominant institution
of our time has been created
in the image of
a psychopath
who bears moral responsibility
for its actions?
Can a building have
moral opinions?
Can a building have
social responsibility?
If a building cant have
social responsibility
what does it mean to
say a corporation can?
A corporation is simply
an artificial legal structure
but the people
who are engaged in it
whether the stockholder
whether the
executives in it
whether the employees
they all have
moral responsibilities.
It's a fair assumption
that every human being
real human beings
flesh and
blood ones
not corporations
but every flesh and blood
human being is a moral person.
You know we've
got the same genes
we're more or less
the same
but our nature
the nature of humans
allows all kinds
of behaviour.
I mean everyone of us
under some circumstances
could be a gas chamber
attendant and a saint.
No job in my experience
with Goodyear
has been as frustrating
as the CEO job.
Because even though
the perception is
that you have absolute power
to do whatever you want
the reality is
you don't have that power
and so metes if you had
really free hand
if you really did what
you wanted to do
that suits your
personal thoughts
and your personal priorities
you'd act differently.
But as a CEOm
you cannot do that
Layoff shave become
so wide-spread
that people
tend to believe that
CEOs make these decisions
without any consideration
to the human implications
of their decisions
It is never a decision
that any CEO makes lightly.
It is a tough decision.
But it is the consequence
of modern capitalism
When you look
at a corporation
just like when
you look at a slave owner
you want to distinguish
between the institution
and the individual.
So slavery for example
or other forms of tyranny
are inherently monstrous
but the individuals
participating in them
may be the nicest guys
you could imagine
benevolent friendly
nice to their children
even nice to their slaves
caring about other people.
I mean as individuals
they may be anything.
In their institutional
role they're monsters
because the institution
is monstrous.
Then the same is true here.
My wife and I some years
ago had a tour home
a demonstration.
25 people arrived
they hung a big banner
on the top of our house
saying murderers
they danced around outside
with gasmasks and so on.
As a public demonstration
it wasn't very effective
due to the fact that this
is a very rural area
two people and a dog
and it's not
a very big house
which I think rather
surprised them
but then we sat down
and talked to them
for a couple of hours
and we gave them
tea and coffee
and they had
lunch on our lawn.
After about 20
minutes they said
Well the problem is
not you. It's Shell.
And I said now wait a
minute lets talk about
what is Shell?
It's made up
of people like me.
In the end what we
found in that discussion
were all the things
they we're worried about
I was worried about as well
climate oppressive
regimes human rights
the big difference
between us was
I feel that I can actually
make a contributions to this
these people
were frustrated
because they felt that
they had no nothing to do.
So an individual
CEO lets say
may really care
about the environment
and in fact
since they have such
extraordinary resources
they can even devote some of
their resources to that
without violating
their responsibility
to be totally inhuman
which is why
as the Moody Starts
serve tea to protestors
Shell Nigeria can flare
unrivalled amounts of gas
making it of the worlds single
worst sources of pollution.
And all the professed concerns
about the environment
do not spare Ken Saro Wiwa
and eight other activists
from being hung for opposing
Shells environment practices
in the Niger Delta.
The corporation
is not a person
it doesn't think.
People in it think
and for them it is legitimate
to create terminator technology.
So that farmers are not
able to save their seeds.
Seeds that will
destroy themselves
through a suicide gene.
Seeds that are designed to only
produce crop in one season.
You really need to
have a brutal mind.
It's a war against evolution
to even think in those terms.
But quite clearly profits are
so much higher in their minds
The profit motive
which drove Klutzy
to accomplish so much
may bring out the evil
as well as the good...
Hellooo?
My work spans
all industry sectors
I mean I virtually have
worked for like Id say
25 percent
of the fortune 500.
Ive posed as
an investment banker.
Ive posed as a
venture capitalist.
Ive set up
front companies
that are executive
recruiting firms.
Essentially I'm a spy.
I'll locate
your employees
and I will tell them
that I'm calling
from Acme
Recruiting Agency
and that I've got a
job that pays them
considerably more than
what they're paying.
Would they mind meeting
me for an interview?
And when the executive
shows up
what he doesn't
realize is
I'm actually debriefing him
on behalf of a competitor.
That there is no job
and that the office
that he's at
has been rented
and the picture on my desk
of my family is a phoney
and it's all just a big
elaborate ruse
to glean competitive
information from him.
I don't feel any guilt.
It's you know what I mean
you have to expect
that guys like me
are out there.
We're predators.
It's about competition
it's about market share
it's about
being aggressive
and it's about
shareholder value.
What is your
stock at today?
If you're a CEO
I mean do you think your
shareholders really care
whether you're Billie
Buttercup or not?
Do you think that
they really
they would prefer you
to be a nice guy?
Over having money
in their pocket?
I don't think so.
I think people want money.
That's the bottom line.
The fact that most of these
companies are run
by white men
white rich men
means that they
are out of touch
with what the majority
of the world is.
Because the majority
of this planet
are not a bunch
of rich white guys.
They are people
of other colours
they are the majority.
Women are the majority
the poor
and working poor
make up the majority
of this planet.
So the decisions
they make
come from not the reality
that exists in the world.
How much is enough?
How much is enough?
If you are a billionaire
would it be okay just
to be a half a billionaire?
Wouldn't it be okay
for your company
to make a little
less money...
When I bought those
two airplane tickets
for Phil Knight and myself
to fly to Indonesia
I was prepared for him
to say okay lets go.
Oh no not a chance
Not a chance.
No?
They're transferable.
I can change it
to another day.
And call me on it.
Call my bluff.
He's a smart guy.
I mean he's not
he's not stupid.
And so I thought okay
get ready for this.
Especially because you know
I bought first-class tickets.
So you know it would be a
comfortable ride at least
you know and of course he
tells me then on camera.
Ive never been to Indonesia.
And I'm like taken
aback by this.
I cant believe it.
The guys the head
of the company
he's never walked through
his own factories.
Oh you've got to go.
I cant go right now and
the rest of this year.
When we were done
filming he calls me up
a couple of weeks
later and he goes
I may have a chance to go
there with you to the factories.
Im going to the Australian
Open to watch some tennis.
And uh you know
maybe I can get up there
or at least
you can go there.
Would you like to go
to the Australian open?
For 21 years
I never gave a thought
to what we were taking
from the earth or
doing to the earth
in the making
of our products.
And then
in the summer of 1994
we began to hear questions
from our customers
we had never
heard before
What's your company doing
for the environment?
And we didn't have answers.
The real answer
was not very much.
And it really disturbed
many of our people
not me so
much as them
and a group in our
research department
decided to convene
a taskforce
and bring people from our
businesses around the world
to come together
to assess
our company's world wide
environment position
to begin to frame answers
for those customers.
They asked me if I would come
and speak to that group
and give them
a kick off speech
and launch this new task force
with an environmental vision
and I didn't have
an environmental vision
and I did not want
to make that speech.
And at sort of
the propitious moment
this book
landed on my desk.
It was Paul Hawkins book
The Ecology of Commerce
and I began to read The
Ecology of Commerce,
really desperate
for inspiration
and very quickly
into that book
I found the phrase
The death of birth.
It was E.O. Wilson's expression
for species extinction
The death of birth
and it was a point
of a spear into my chest
and I read on and
the spear went deeper
and it became an
epiphanal experience
a total change
of mindset for myself
and a change of paradigm.
Can any product be
made sustainably?
Well not any
and every product.
Can you make
landmines sustainably?
Well I don't think so.
There's a more fundamental
question than that
about landmines.
Some products ought
not to be made at all.
Unless we can make carpets
sustainably you know
perhaps we don't have a place
in a sustainable world
but neither does anybody else
making products unsustainably.
One day early in this journey
it dawned on me that
the way Id been
running interface
is the way
of the plunderer
plundering something
that's not mine
something that belongs
to every creature on earth
and I said to myself
my goodness
the day must come
when this is illegal
when plundering
is not allowed
it must come.
So I said to
myself my goodness
some day people like
me will end up in jail.
Ive got to be
honest with you.
When the September 11th
situation happened
I didn't know that
the and I must say
and I want to say
this because its
I don't want
to take it lightly
it's not a light
situation.
It's a devastating act.
It was really a bad thing
it's one of
the worse things
I've seen in my
lifetime you know.
But I will tell you and every
trader will tell you
who was not in
that building
and who was buying gold
and who owned gold and silver
that when it happened
the first thing
you thought about was
well how much is gold up?
The first thing
that came to mind was
my god gold must
be exploding.
Fortunately for us all
our clients were in gold.
So when it went up they
all doubled their money.
They've all doubled
their money.
It was a blessing
in disguise.
Devastating you know
crushing heart shattering
but on the
financial sense
for my clients that
were in the market
they all made money.
Now I wasn't looking
for this type of help
but it happened.
When the us bombed
Iraq back in 1991
the price of oil went
from $13 to $40 a barrel
for Christ sake!
Now we couldn't wait
for the bombs
to start raining down
on Saddam Hussein.
We were all excited.
We wanted Saddam to
really create problems
Do whatever you
have to do
set fire to some
more oil wells
because the price is
going to go higher.
Every broker was
chanting that
there was not a broker
that I know of
that wasn't
excited about that.
This was a disaster.
This was something
that was you know
catastrophe happening.
Bombing wars
In devastation there
is opportunity.
The pursuit of profit
is an old story
but there was a time when
many things were regarded
either as too sacred or too
essential for the public good
to be considered business
opportunities.
They were protected
by tradition
and public regulation.
We can really begin to take
a look at the emergence
of the modern age with
the enclosure movements
of the great European
commons in the fourteenth
fifteenth and
sixteenth century.
Medieval life uh was
a collectively lived life
It was a brutish
nasty affair.
But there was a collective
responsibility
People belonged to the land;
the land did not belong
to the people.
And in this
European world
people farmed the land
in a collective way
because they saw
it as a commons.
It belonged to God.
And then it was
administered by the church
the aristocracy
and then the local manors
as stewards of gods creation.
Beginning with Tudor England
we began to see
a phenomenon emerge
and that is the enclosure
of the great commons
by Parliamentary
Acts in England
and then in Europe.
And so first we began to
take the great landmasses
of the world
which were
commons and shared
and we reduced those
to private property.
Then we went after the oceans
the great oceanic commons
and we created laws
and regulations
that would allow countries
to claim a certain amount
of water outside
their coastal limits
for exploitation.
In this century we
went after the air
and we divided it
into air corridors
that could be bought
and sold
for commercial traffic
for airplanes.
And then of course
the rest is history.
With deregulation
privatization free trade
what we're seeing is
yet another enclosure
and if you like private
taking of the commons.
One of the things I find
very interesting
in our current debates
is this concept
of who creates wealth.
That wealth is only created
when it's owned privately.
What would you call
clean water fresh air
a safe environment?
Are they not
a form of wealth?
And why does it only become
wealth when some entity
puts a fence around it and
declares it private property?
Well you know that's
not wealth creation.
That's wealth usurpation.
Over the centuries
we have put more and more
things in that public realm
and lately just lately
in the last
lets say in the last
three or four decades
started pulling
them out again.
So fire-fighters
for instance.
Fire-fighters started
as private companies
and if you didn't
have the medallion
of a given
fire-fighter brigade
on your house and
it was on fire
those fire-fighters
would just ride on by
because you didn't
have a deal.
Well it gradually
evolved a public trust
for the provision of safety
on that very specific level.
This is important.
We should not go back
from that and start saying
well you know why don't we
put that back in the market
and see what that does?
Maybe it will make
it more efficient
Privatization does not mean
you take a public institution
and give it
to some nice person.
It means you take a public
institution and give it
to an unaccountable tyranny.
Public institutions
have many side benefits
For one thing they may
purposely run at a loss.
They're not
out for profit.
They may purposely
run at a loss
because of the
side benefits.
So for example if a public
steel industry runs at a loss
it's providing cheap
steel to other industries
maybe that's a good thing.
Public institutions can have
a counter cyclic property
So that means that they can
maintain employment
in periods of recession
which increases demand
which helps you
get out of recession.
Private companies cant
do that in a recession
throw out the work force cause
that's the way you make money.
There are those who intend
that one day everything
will be owned by somebody
and we're not just
talking goods here.
We're talking human
rights human services
essential services for life.
Education public health
social assistance
pensions housing.
We're also talking about
the survival of the planet.
The areas that we believe
must be maintained
in the commons
or under common control
or we will collectively die
Water and air.
Even in the case of air
there's been some progress
and that is the trading
of pollution permits.
And here the idea
is to say
look we cant avoid
the dumping of carbon dioxide.
We cant avoid the dumping
of sulphur oxides
at least we cant at the moment
afford to stopping it
so we're dumping a certain
amount of stuff
into the environment.
So we're going to say
with the current tonnage
of sulphur oxides
for example
we will say
that is the limit.
And well create
permits for that amount
and give them to the people
who've been doing the polluting
and now we will permit
them to be traded.
And so now there's
a price attached
to polluting the environment.
Now wouldn't it be marvellous
if we have one of those prices
for everything?
It sounds like you're
advocating private ownership
of every square
inch of the planet.
Absolutely.
Every cubic foot
of air water.
It sounds outlandish to say
we want to have the
whole universe
the whole of
the earth owned.
That doesn't mean I
want to have Joe Bloggs
owning this square foot.
But it means the interests that
are involved in that stream
are owned by some group
or by some people who have
an interest in maintaining it.
And that you know that
is not such a loony idea.
It's in fact the solution
to a lot of these problems.
Imagine a world in
which one of the things
owned by a corporation was
the song happy birthday.
In fact
an Aol/Time Warner subsidiary
holds the copyright.
In the past
it has demanded
over $10000
to allow you to hear anyone
sing this popular song
in a film.
We didn't pay.
We preferred to use the money
to fly our crew to Boston
and Los Angeles to bring
you the following story
Comparing the marketing
of yesteryear
to the marketing of today
is like comparing
a B.B. Gun to a smart bomb.
It's not the same
as when I was a kid
or even when the people
who are young adults
today were kids.
It's much more sophisticated
and it's much more pervasive.
It's not that products
themselves are bad or good.
It's the notion of
manipulating children
into buying the products.
In 1998 Western
International Media
Century City and Lieberman
Research Worldwide
conducted a study on nagging.
We asked parents to keep
a diary for three weeks
and to record every time
you could imagine
every time their child nagged
them for a product
we asked them to record
when where and why.
This study was not to
help parents cope with nagging.
It was to help corporations
help children nag
for their products
more effectively.
Anywhere form 20 percent
to 40 percent of purchases
would not have occurred
unless the child had
nagged their parents.
That is we
found for example
a quarter of all visits
to theme parks
wouldn't have occurred unless
a child nagged their parents.
Four out of ten visits
to places like Chuck E. Cheese
would not have occurred.
And any parent would
understand that
you know when I
think of Chuck E. Cheese
oh my goodness
its noise.
And there's
so many kids.
Why would I want to
spend two hours there?
But if the child nags
enough you 're going to go
We saw the same thing with
movies with home video
with fast food...
We do have to break
through this barrier
where they do tell us
or they say
they don't like it
when their kid snag.
Well that's just a general
attitude that they possess.
It doesn't mean that they
necessarily act upon it
a 100 percent of the time.
You can manipulate
consumers into wanting
and therefore buying
your products.
It's a game.
Children are
not little adults;
their minds
aren't developed.
And what's happening is that
the marketers are playing
to their developmental
vulnerabilities.
The advertising that
children are exposed to today
is honed by psychologists;
it's enhanced by
media technology
that nobody ever
thought was possible.
The more insight you have
about the consumer
the more creative you'll be in
your communication strategies.
So if that takes
a psychologist
yeah we want one
of those on staff.
Im not saying it's wrong
to make things for children.
I also think its
important to distinguish
between psychologists who
work on products for children
to help you know toy
corporations make toys
that are developmentally
appropriate.
I think that's great
that's different
from selling the toys
directly to the children.
Initiative is huge.
I think in
the U.S. We place
about $12 billion
of media time.
So well put it on TV
well put it in print
well put it up in outdoor
well buy radio time;
so we're the biggest buyers of
advertising time and space
in the U.S.
And in the world.
One family cannot combat
an industry that spends
$12 billion a year trying
to get their children.
They cant do it.
They are tomorrows
adult consumers
To start talking with them now
build that relationship
when they're younger...
And you've got
them as an adult.
Somebody asked me you
know Lucy is that ethical?
You know you're essentially
manipulating these children.
Well yeah
is it ethical?
I don't know.
But our role at initiative
is to move products
And if we know
you move products
with a certain
creative execution
placed in a certain
type of media vehicle
then we've
done our job.
Every institution
provides the people
who are members of it
with asocial
role to occupy
And typically institutions
that are vibrant
and have a lot of power
will specify that role
in some sense as
a list of virtues.
It's true for churches
for schools
for any institution that
has power over people
and shapes them.
The corporation likewise.
It provides us
with a list of virtues
a kind of social role
which is
the good consumer.
Like the waters
of the mighty ocean
people also represent
tremendous force
the understanding of which
is the greatest importance
to the American
way of life.
This force is known
as consumer power.
The goal for the corporations
is to maximize profit
and market share.
And they also have a goal
for their target
namely the population.
They have to be turned into
completely mindless consumers
of goods that
they do not want.
You have to develop what
are called created wants
So you have
to create wants.
You have to pose
on people what's called
a philosophy of futility.
You have to focus them
on the insignificant
things of life
like fashionable consumption.
Im just basically quoting
business literature.
And it makes
perfect sense.
The ideal is to have
individuals
who are totally disassociated
from one another.
Who's conception of
themselves the sense of value
is just how many created
wants can I satisfy?
These people are customers
because they are willing
to trade money for widgets.
And all the customers
take the widgets home
to all parts
of the country.
Look at all the money
the widget builder has
taken in from the sale
of his widgets.
We have huge industries
public relations industry
monstrous industry
advertising and so on
which are designed
from infancy to try
to mould people
into this desired pattern.
We saw
Tiger Woods on TV
with a hat
with a Nike logo on it
and we figured you know
he probably gets
like millions of dollars
just to wear the hat
on a press conference.
And therefore we figured we
can do that for someone else.
And hopefully get money in
time so we can go to school.
And that show we came up with
being corporately sponsored.
We made our sponsor
announcement
on the Today Show
on June 18
...were thrilled to be
sponsored by First U.S.A...
We're thrilled to be working with
first U.S.A as our corporate
sponsor and they're covering
our college tuition...
...we found First U.S.A as our
sponsor and we're proud
to be working with them...
...our sponsor if First U.S. A
we're really thrilled
to announce First U.S. A
as our sponsor...
...we're thrilled to be
working with First U.S. A...
and so we give First U.S. A
a good name in the media
and include them
in our news stories
and through there
they get as much advertising
as we can give them.
They'll be conforming
not to the wishes of
demanding parents
but to the wishes of an image
conscious corporation...
They're not just out there for
the money and they're just...
I mean they want
to work with us
and be our friends and let
us help them help us
and vice versa.
And we became
walking billboards
to pay for our
college tuition.
Cool Site of the day
picked us as a cool site
and Yahoo picked us and
we were in U.S.A Today.
When we did our photo
shoot for people magazine
When we did our photo
shoot for people magazine
This is where we
stood up on top.
We stood up here
and we smiled.
We smiled and
took the picture.
Our parents had war stories
and stuff to tell us.
We have our corporate
sponsor story.
Exactly.
I have a lot of faith
in the corporate world
because it's always
going to be there
so you may as well
have faith in it
because if you don't
then it's just not good.
Some of the best
creative minds
are employed to
assure our faith
in the corporate
worldview.
They seduce us with corporate
beguiling illusions.
Designed to divert
our minds
and manufacture
our consent.
Corporations don't advertise
products particularly;
they're advertising
a way of life.
A way of thinking.
A story of who we are as people
and how we got here and
you know what's the source
of our so called liberty
and so called freedom.
You know so you have decades
and decades and decades
of propaganda and
education
teaching us to think
in a certain way.
When applied to
the large corporation
it's that the corporation
is was inevitable
that it's indispensable
that it is somehow
remarkably efficient
and that it is responsible
for the sort of
for progress and
the good life.
Perception management is a
very interesting concept
It's basically a methodology
which helps us when
we work with our clients
to go through a very systematic
thoughtful process
in order to be able to
help our clients identify
what the resources are
that they have.
What the barriers to their
success are
and how we can use
communications
to help them accomplish
their objectives.
If Michael or Angelica came
tome and said
Dad what do you do
and why is it important?
My answer to that question
is basically
that I help corporations
have a voice.
And I help corporations
share the point of view
about how they
feel about things.
They're selling
themselves
they're selling
their domination
they're selling
their rule
and they're creating
an image for themselves
as just regular folks
down the block.
Hi how
y'all doing today?
Good to see you.
How are you doing today?
Hi how you
doing today?
We're from Pfizer.
We're your neighbours.
You're in the new houses?
Are you in the new houses?
Ohhhhhh!
These are some neighbours.
Can we say hello?
Can we say hello
just for a minute?
So what do you think
of the neighbourhood now?
It's all right
it's good.
Yeah I think it's been
getting better
over the last 20 years
that I've been coming here.
Yeah
So I think together you
know working with you
and Pfizer and our
other partnership
well make this
a better place.
Okay.
Okay nice to see
you Miss Fraser bye.
There used to be a lot
of crime at this subway.
One night as I was going
home I got caught
and was almost mugged.
So we decided
to make a change
to make
this community better.
We're looking
at turnstiles
that prevent fare beating.
It used to be you could
just hop right over.
So Pfizer in collaboration
with the transit authority
actually purchased
these machines.
This is a talkback box
that allows us to speak
to the Pfizer guard
which is approximately
500 yards from here.
Now I haven't seen
the Pfizer guard today
but I'm going to see
if I can call him.
If he's not I'll have
to go wake him up.
Hello.
Hello.
Tom Kline speaking.
So I'm sure
before we're through
hell call back.
But particularly
on the off-hours
this allows a passenger
to call directly
to the Pfizer
desk for assistance.
And then the Pfizer guard
calls the transit police
and the transit police respond
to any crime situation.
As a result of all this
crime is down in that station.
It's much safer for
our community partners.
Thank you.
I'll press the other button
just to be sure...
Well go over and
talk to him personally.
It's tough you know
they're putting
some taxpayer shareholder
money into helping
and who can say?
But that money should be
going to the taxpayers
to decide what to do.
And while they're doing
those sorts of nice things
they're also playing a role in
lowering taxes for corporations
and lowering taxes
for wealthy people
and reconfiguring
public policy.
And what we don't see is all
that reconfiguring going on;
we don't see all that
vacuuming up of money
vacuuming out the insides
of public processes
but we do see
the nice faade.
When I was researching
the takeover of public space
when I started off I thought
okay this is just advertising.
We've always had advertising.
It's just more advertising.
But what I started
to understand
and what I
understand now
is that branding if not
advertising its production.
The very
successful corporations
the corporations of the future
do not produce products.
They produced
brand meaning.
The dissemination of
the idea of themselves
is their act of production.
And the dissemination of
the idea of themselves
is an enormously
invasive project
so how do you
make a brand idea?
Well a good place to
start is by building
a three dimensional
manifestation of your brand.
For accompany like Disney
it goes even further
where it's actually building
a town Celebration Florida.
Currently there are
about 5000 residents
who call Celebration home.
And there are about 1300
single-family homes
a town centre that's a place
where people gather.
It has about four
or five restaurants
and about a dozen
other shops.
Their inspiration
their brand image
is the all American family.
And the sort of
by gone American town.
Their brand driver is family
magic and everything
that the company does is in
and around those two words.
If you take that
a branded environment
such as a Disney World
or a Disneyland is a logical
extension of that brand.
Film animated film
family oriented film;
it's a very logical
extension of that.
As a business though
they also know that
if they want to get
into other forms of
entertainment
that does not fit
family magic
they do not brand
it Disney.
If they want to get
into adult
more serious type fare
when it comes to film
they brand it Touchstone.
Disney brand
speaks of reassurance
it speaks of tradition
it speaks of quality.
And you can see that here
in this community
that we've built.
And that's where you
see the truly imperialist
aspirations of branding
which is about building
these privatized
branded cocoons.
Which maybe you start
by shopping in
and then you continue
by holidaying in
but eventually why
not just move in.
What happens if we
wake up one day
and we find out that virtually
all of our relationships
that are mediated between
us and our fellow human beings
are commercial?
We find out that virtually
every relationship we have
is a commercially
arbitrated relationship
with our fellow human being?
Can civilization survive on
that narrow a definition
of how we interact
with each other?
Wow what a dream...
I can give you the day
in the life of a person
who might be the target
of undercover marketing.
And I will
tell you this
that some of these things
are happening right now
around you.
So you walk out of your
building in the morning
in some city
and you walk by
the doorman and say
hey good morning!
And you notice there's a
bunch of boxes at his feet
from some on line
or mail order retailer.
And there's a bunch of boxes
there with of course
big brand message on it.
You walk out
and wonder
a lot of people must be
ordering from that company.
Well what you don't know is
that we paid the doorman
to keep those
empty boxes there.
You walk out
into the street
and you hear some people
having kind of a loud conversation
about a musical act
and they are passing
headphones back and forth
and going
this is great!
Hey do you know that I heard
this CD is really hard to find
but I heard they
sell it at store X.
You hear that and
you register it
and you might kind
of pick up on that
and may be later
on you'll think
hey I wonder what the
hot act is bang
that might be in your head.
Now you get
into your office
and there's a certain brand
of water in the refrigerator.
What is that?
You take it out you drink
you slug it down it's there
not really
thinking about it.
Wow!
That's pretty good water.
Who knows?
Maybe someone placed
the water there
You kind of go out
for your lunch break
you're sitting in the park and
people are kind of out there
talking in the
park and bang
all of a sudden you
hear another message.
By the time you go to bed
you've probably received
eight or nine different
undercover messages.
People are always thinking
well oh I know
product placement.
That's when they
put stuff in movies!
Well yes kind of.
I mean that's definitely
traditional product placement.
But real life product
placement is just that:
Placing stuff in movies but
the movie's actually your life
Well take a group
of attainable
but still
inspirational people
they are not supermodels
they are kind of
people just like you
they're doing
something for us
whether they are having
a certain kind of drink
or they are using
a certain laundry detergent
whatever it may be.
They are kind of the
roach motel if you will
People are going
to come over to them
and they are
going to give them
this little piece
of brand bait.
It could be a sound bite
of knowledge or a ritual.
Consumers will get that
piece of roach bait
then they
would take it.
Oh pretty cool!
Then they go out and
spread it to their friends.
If you want to be critical
if you want to go through
your life like that
sure be critical
of every single person
that walks up to you.
But if they are showing
you something that fits
and something that works
and something that makes
your life better in some way
well then who cares.
We again
just say thanks!
Today the job of building
this nation geographically
is completed.
There are no new frontiers
within or borders.
So to what new horizons
can we look now?
Where are tomorrows
opportunities?
What's ahead for you
for your children?
The frontiers of the
future are not on any map.
They're in the test
tubes and laboratories
of the great industries.
The Chakrabarty case is one of
the great judicial moments
in world history.
And the public
was totally unaware
it was actually happening as
a process was being engaged.
General Electric
and Professor Chakrabarty
went to the patent office
with a little microbe
that eats up oil spills.
They said they had modified
this microbe in the laboratory
and therefore it
was an invention.
The patent office and
the U.S. Government
took a look at this
quote invention;
they said no way.
The patent statures don't
cover living things.
This is not an invention.
Turned down.
Then General Electric and
Doctor Chakrabarty
appealed to the U.S. Customs
Court of Appeal.
And to everyone's surprise
by a three to two decision
they overrode
the patent office.
They said this
microbe looks more
like a detergent
or a reagent
than a horse or a honeybee.
I laugh because they didn't
understand basic biology;
it looked like a
chemical to them.
Had it had an antenna or
eyes or wings or legs
it would never have crossed
their table and been patented.
Then the patent
office appealed.
And what the public
should realize now
is the patent office
was very clear
that you cant
patent life.
My organization provided
the main amicus curiae brief
if you allow the patent on
this microbe we argued
it means that without any
congressional guidance
or public discussion
corporations will own
the blueprints of life.
When they made the decision
we lost by five to four
and Chief Justice
Warren said
sure some of these
are big issues
but we think this
is a small decision.
Seven years later
the U.S. Patent office issued
a one sentence decree
you can patent anything
in the world that's alive
except a full birth
human being.
We've all been hearing
about the announcement
that we have mapped
the human genome.
But what the public
doesn't know
is now there's this great
race by genomic companies
and biotech companies
and life science companies
to find the treasure
in the map.
The treasure are
the individual genes
that make up the blueprint
of the human race.
Every time they capture
agene and isolate it
these biotech companies
they claim it as
intellectual property.
The breast cancer gene
the cystic fibrosis gene
it goes on and
on and on.
If this goes unchallenged in
the world community
within less than 10 years
a handful of global
companies will own
directly or through license
the actual genes that make up
the evolution of our species.
And they're now beginning
to patent the genomes
of every other creature
on this planet.
In the age of biology the
politics is going to sort out
between those who believe life
first has intrinsic value
and therefore we should
choose technologies
and commercial venues
that honour
the intrinsic value...
And then we're going
to have people who believe
look life is
a simple utility.
It's commercial fare
and they will line up
with the idea
to let the marketplace be
the ultimate arbiter
of all of the age
of biology.
In a world economy where
information is filtered
by global media corporations
keenly attuned to their
powerful advertisers
who will defend
the publics right to know?
And what price must be
paid to preserve our ability
to make informed choices?
What Fox Television told us
was that we were just the people
to be the investigators.
Do any stories you want
ask tough questions
and get answers.
So we thought
this is great
this is a dream job.
Fantastic.
The very first
thing they had us do
was not to research stories
but to shoot this
promo which was...
The Investigators.
Uncovering the truth
getting results
protecting you.
And they had a film
crew a smoke machine
were silhouetted...
One of the first stories
that Jane came up with
was the revelation
that most of the milk
in the state of Florida
and throughout much of the
country was adulterated
with the effects of bovine
growth hormone
with Monsanto I didn't realize
how effectively a corporation
could work to get something
on the marketplace.
The levels of coordination
they had to have.
They had to get university
professors into the fold.
They had to get
experts into the fold.
They had to get
reporters into the fold
They had to get
the public into the fold
and of course the FDA
lets not leave them out.
They had to get the federal
regulators convinced
that this was
a fine and safe product
to get it onto the
marketplace.
And they did that;
they did that
very very well.
Posilac is a single most
tested product in history
and is now available
to you specifically.
So you can increase
your profit potential.
The federal government
basically rubber stamped it
before they put it
on the marketplace.
The longest test they
did for human toxicity
was 90 days on thirty rats.
And then either Monsanto
misreported the results
to the FDA
or the FDA didn't bother
to look in depth
at Monsanto's own studies.
The scientists within Health
Canada looked very carefully
at bovine growth hormone
and came to very
different conclusions
than the Food and Drug
Administration in the U.S. Did
Monsanto's engineered
growth hormone did not comply
with safety requirements.
It could be absorbed
by the body
and therefore did have
implications for human health.
Mysteriously that
conclusion was deleted
from the final published
version of their report...
I personally
was very concerned
that there's a very serious
problem of secrecy
conspiracy and things
of that nature.
We have been pressured
and coerced
to pass drugs of
questionable safety
including RB ST.
We wrote the story.
We had it ready a
week beforehand.
They bought ads
...farmers in the milk
industry say it's safe
but studies suggest
a link to cancer.
Don't miss this special report
from The Investigators...
That Friday night before the
Monday the series was to begin
the fax machine
spit out a letter
from this very high priced
lawyer in New York
that Monsanto had hired.
It contained a lot of
things that were just
off-the-wall false
Just demonstrably false
but if you didn't
know the story
and you didn't know how
wed gone about producing
it would have scared
you as a broadcaster
or as a manager.
And they decided that they
would pull the story
and they would just check
it one more time.
But the bottom line was that
there was no factual errors
in that story.
Both sides had been
heard from
both sides had had an
opportunity to speak.
One week later
Monsanto sent
the second letter
and this was even
more strongly worded.
And it said there will be dire
consequences for Fox News
if the story airs
in Florida.
And this time
they freaked.
They were afraid
of being sued
and losing
advertising dollars.
And all of the stations
owned by Rupert Murdoch.
And he owned more television
stations than any
other group in America.
That's 22
television stations.
That's a lot of
advertising dollars.
For Round Up Aspartame
Nutra Sweet
and other products.
So we got into
a battle.
And uh the first deal was
the new general manager
his name's Dave and
Dave is a salesman.
And you know
he'd pump your hand
how ya doin
how ya doin?
Called us upstairs to
his office and he said
what would you say if
I killed this piece?
What if it never ran?
And we said
well you know
we wouldn't be very
happy about that.
And he said well I
could kill it you know
and we said yes of
course you're the manager
you could kill it
it would never air.
And he hemming
and he showing.
He's back
and he's forth.
And we couldn't figure out
what is this all about
and finally
he blurted out
look would
you tell anybody?
You know I said I'm
not going to lie for you.
And about a week later he
calls us back to the office
and says okay wed like you
to make these changes.
In fact you will
make these changes.
We said well look let us
show you the research
that we have that
shows that this information
you want us to
broadcast isn't true.
To which he replies.
I don't care about that.
I said pardon me?
And he said well that's
what I have lawyers for
just write it the way the
lawyers want it written.
I said you know
this is news
this is important.
This is stuff
people wanted to know.
And I'll never forget he
didn't pause a beat
and he said
we just paid three
billion dollars
for these
television stations
Well tell you what
the news is.
The news is what
we say it is.
I said I'm not
doing that.
And and he said
Well he said if you refuse
to present this story
the way we think it
should be presented
you'll be fired
for insubordination.
I said I will go to the Federal
Communications Commissions
and I will report that
I was fired from my job by you
the licensee of these
public airwaves
because I refused to lie
to people on the air.
And it's thank you very much
you'll hear from us right away.
Well 24 hours came and went
and we didn't hear a thing.
And about a week later
he calls us back
and now we've
changed strategies.
How about if we
pay you some money
and you just go away?
And I said
how much money?
Because when somebody
offers to bribe you like that
I always want to know if
it might be worth it.
He was going to offer us the
rest of our years salary
if we agreed not to talk about
what Monsanto had done
To not talk about the Fox
corporate response
in suppressing the story.
And to not talk
about the story.
Not talk about BGH
again anywhere.
Not take this story to
another new organization.
Zip up.
I said you mean if I want to go
to my daughter's PTA meetings
and explain what's
in the school milk
at the school lunch
program I cant?
No you can never speak
about this anywhere.
Steve says
okay write it up.
And I'm like what are you
talking about write it up?
And I didn't say anything.
And Dave he wrote it
up and he FedEx it to us
a couple of days later.
And he said
are you going to sign?
And we said nah Dave
we're not going to sign that.
And he said well
send it back okay?
We said no Dave were
not going to send that back.
It was okay we
cant buy you out
we cant shut you up
lets get the story on the air
in a way that we can all agree
it will go on the air.
And we started rewriting and
editing with their lawyers.
During this eight month
re-review process
I say jokingly they did things
like for example they wanted
to take out
the word cancer.
You don't have to identify
what the potential problem is
just say human
health implications.
Any criticism
of Monsanto or its product
they either removed
it or minimized it.
And it was very very
clear I would say
almost every edit
they made to the piece
that was the aim.
And we changed this
and this and this.
And then that
wasn't good enough
okay now change
this and this.
Now change this and this.
Version after version
after version.
83 times.
83 times is unheard
of it doesn't happen
you shouldn't have to
rewrite something 83 times
Obviously they didn't want
to put the thing on the air
and they were trying to drive us
crazy and get us to quit
or wait until the first
window in our contract
so that they
could fire us.
They in effect announced that
they were going to fire us
for no cause.
Well this was
a little much.
And Steve wrote a letter
to the lawyer in Atlanta
whose name is Caroline Forest
the Fox corporate lawyer.
And I said you know this isn't
about being fired for no cause.
You're firing us because we
refused to put on the air
something that we knew and
demonstrated to be false
and misleading.
That's what
this is about.
And because we
put up a fight
because we stood up
to this big corporation
and we stood up
to your editors
and we stood up
to your lawyers.
And we said to you
look there ought
to be a principle higher
than just making money.
And she wrote a
letter back and said
you are right that's
exactly what it was.
You stood up
to us on this story
and that's why
we're letting you go.
Big mistake
That says retaliation.
You cant retaliate
against employees
if they're standing
up for something
that they believe is illegal
that they don't want
to participate in.
So that gave us
the whistleblower
stats that wanted
in the state of Florida to
file a whistleblower claim
against our employer.
Two or three years
later we got the trial.
Five weeks of testimony led
to a jury verdict of $425000
in which the jury determined
that the story they
pressured us to broadcast
the story we resisted
telling was in fact false
distorted or slanted.
Fox News
appealed the verdict.
Five major news media
corporations filed briefs
with the court in support
of Fox appeal.
You may recall that Jane Akre
a former reporter here
sued Fox 13 in
a whistleblower lawsuit
claiming that
she was fired
for refusing
to distort her report;
the Appeals Court today
threw that case out
saying Ms. Akre had
no whistleblower claim
against the station
based on news distortion.
Fox 13 vice president and
general manager Bob Linger
says the station
has been completely
vindicated by the ruling...
What Fox neglected
to report is this
Jane sued Fox under Florida's
whistleblower statute
which protects those who try
to prevent others
from breaking the law.
Buther Appeal Court judges
found that falsifying news
isn't actually
against the law.
So they denied Jane her
whistleblower stats
overturned the case and
withdrew her $425000 award.
Canada and Europe have
upheld the ban on RBGH.
But it remains hidden
in the milk supply
of the United States
The prospect that two thirds
of the worlds population
will have no access to fresh
drinking water by 2025
has provoked
the initial confrontations
in a world wide battle
for control over the planets
most basic resource.
When Bolivia sought
to refinance
the public water services
of its third largest city
the World Bank
required privatization
which is how the Bechtel
Corporation of San Francisco
gained control over all
of Cochabamba's water
even that which
fell from the sky.
The price this
beleaguered country paid
for World Bank loans
was the privatization
of the state oil industry
and its airline railroad
electric and phone companies.
But the government failed
to convince Bolivians
that water is
a commodity like any other.
Bolivia was determined
to defend
the corporations right
to charge families
living on $2 a day
as much as one quarter
of their income for water.
The greater the popular
resistance
to the water
privatization scheme
the more violent
became the standoff.
Translational corporations
have a long and dark history
of condoning tyrannical
governments.
I s it narcissism that compels
them to seek their reflection
in the regimented structures
of fascist regimes?
There was
an interesting connection
between the rise
of fascism in Europe
and the consciousness
of politically radical people
about corporate power.
Because there was are cognition
that fascism rose
in Europe
with the help of
enormous corporations.
Mussolini was greatly admired
all across the spectrum
business loved him
investment shot up.
Incidentally when
Hitler came in
in Germany the same
thing happened there
investment shot
up in Germany.
He had the work
force under control.
He was getting rid of dangerous
left wing elements.
Investment opportunities
were improving.
There was no problems.
These are
wonderful countries.
I think one of the greatest
untold stories
of the twentieth century
is the collusion
between corporations
especially in America
and Nazi Germany.
First in terms of how the
corporations from America
helped to essentially
rebuild Germany
and support the early
Nazi regime.
And then when
the war broke out
figured out a way to
keep everything going.
So General Motors was
able to keep Opal going
Ford was able to keep
their thing going
and companies like Coca Cola
they couldn't keep
the Coca Cola going
so what they did was
they invented Fanta Orange
for the Germans
and that show Coke was
able to keep
their profits coming in
to Coca Cola.
So when you drink
Fanta Orange
that's the Nazi drink
that was created so that Coke
could continue making money
while millions of people died.
When Hitler came
to power in 1933
his goal was to dismantle
and destroy the
Jewish community.
This was an enterprise
so vast
that it required the resources
of a computer.
But in 1933 there
was no computer
What there was
was the IBM
punch card system
which controlled
and stored information
based upon the holes
that were punched
in various rows
and columns.
Naturally there was
no off the shelf software
as there is today.
Each applicant was custom
designed and an engineer
had to personally
configure it.
Millions of people of
all religions nationalities
and characteristics
went through
the concentration
camp system.
That's an extraordinary
traffic management program
that required
an IBM system
in every railroad
direction
and an IBM system in every
concentration camp.
Now this is a typical
prisoner card.
There are little boxes
where all the information
is to be punched in.
We compare this information
to the code sheet
for concentration camps.
And here you see
Auschwitz is one
Buchenwald is two
and Dachau is three.
Now what kinds of
prisoners were they?
They could be a Jehovah's
witness for two
a homosexual for three
a communist for six
or a Jew for eight.
Now what was their stats?
One was released
two was transferred
four was executed
five was suicide
and six.
Code six
Sonderbahandlung
special treatment
meant the gas chamber
or sometimes a bullet.
They would punch
that number in
the material was tabulated
and the machines were set.
And of course the
punch cards by the millions
had to be printed.
And they were printed
exclusively by IBM
and the profits were
recovered just after the war
I really do believe that
particular accusation
has been fairly discredited
as a serious accusation.
They used equipment
that is a fact
but how they got it
how much co operation
they got
and any kind
of collusion
trying to connect dots
that are not connected
I think that's the part
that is discredited.
Generally you sell computers
and they are used
in a variety of ways
and you always
hope they are
using the more
positive ways possible.
If you ever found out
they're used in ways
that are not positive
then you would hope you
would stop supporting that
but you know do
you always know?
Can you always tell?
Can you always find out?
IBM would
of course say
they had no control over
its German subsidiaries.
But here on
October 9th 1941
a letter is being
written directly
to Thomas J. Watson
with all sorts of detail
of the activity of
the German subsidiary
none of these
machines were sold
they were all
leased by IBM.
They had to be serviced
on site once a month
even if that was
at a concentration camp.
This is a typical contract
with IBM and the Third Reich.
Which was instituted in 1942.
It's not with the Dutch
subsidiary
it's not with the German
subsidiary.
It is with IBM
corporation in New York.
You know as it happens
I know that story.
I discussed it more than once
with old Mr. Watson
and I was around
at the time.
I'm not saying that Watson
didn't know
that the German government
used punch cards.
He probably did know
after all he had
very few customers.
Watson didn't want
to do it.
It was not because he thought
it was immoral or not
but because Watson
with a very keen sense
of public relations
thought it was risky.
It should not surprise us that
corporate allegiance
to profits will trump their
allegiance to any flag.
A recent U.S. Treasury
Department report
revealed in one
week alone
57 U.S. Corporations
were fined
for trading with official
enemies of the United States
including terrorists tyrants
and despotic regimes.
...you can roughly locate any
community somewhere along
a scale running all the way
from democracy to despotism.
This man makes it his job
to study these things...
Well for one thing
avoid the comfortable idea
that the mere form of
government can of itself
safeguard a nation
against despotism.
For big business despotism
was often a useful tool
for securing foreign markets
and pursuing profits.
One of the U.S. Marine corps
most highly decorated generals
Smedley Darlington Butler
by his own account
helped pacify Mexico
for American oil companies
Haiti and Cuba
for National City Bank
Nicaragua for the Brown
Brothers brokerage
the Dominican Republic
for sugar interests
Honduras for U.S. Fruit companies
and China
for standard oil.
General Butlers services
were also in demand
in the United States
in the 1930s
as president
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
sought to relieve
the misery
of the depression through
public enterprise
and to offer regulation
on corporate exploitation
and misdeeds.
More power to you
President Roosevelt
The entire country's
behind you.
Thrilled with hope
and patriotism...
But the country
was not entirely
behind
the populist president.
Large parts of
the corporate elite
despised what Roosevelt's
new deal stood for.
And so in 1934
a group of conspirators
sought to involve
General Butler in
a treasonous plan.
...The plan as outlined tome
was to form an organization
of veterans to use as a bluff
or as a club at least
to intimidate
the government...
but the corporate cabal
had picked the wrong man.
Butler was fed up
being what he called
a gangster for capitalism.
...I appeared before
the Congressional Committee
the highest representation
of the American people
under subpoena to tell what
I knew of activities
which I believed might lead
to an attempt to set up
a fascist dictatorship.
The upshot of the whole
thing was that I was supposed
to lead an organization of
500000 men which would
be able to take over
the functions of government...
A Congressional Committee
ultimately found evidence
of a plot to overthrow
Roosevelt.
According to Butler
the conspiracy included
representatives of some
of Americas top corporations
including J.P. Morgan
Dupont and Goodyear tire.
As today's chairman
of Goodyear knows
for corporations
to dominate government
a coup is no
longer necessary.
Corporations have gone
global and by going global
the governments have lost
some control over corporations
regardless of whether
the corporation can be trusted
or can not be trusted
governments
today do not have
over the corporations
the power that they had
and the leverage they
had 50 or 60 years ago.
And that's a major change.
So governments have
become powerless
compared to what
they were before.
Capitalism today commands
the towering heights
and has displaced
politics and politicians
as the new high priests
and reigning
oligarchs of our system.
So capitalism and its principle
protagonists and players
corporate CEOs
have been accorded unusual
power and access.
This is not to deny the
significance of government
and politicians
but these are
the new high priests.
I was invited to
Washington D.C. To attend
this meeting that
was being put together
by the National
Security Agency called
the Critical
Thinking Consortium.
I remember standing
there in this room
and looking over
on one side of the room
and we had
the CIA NSA DIA FBI
Customs Secret Service
and then on the other
side of the room we had
Coca Cola Mobile Oil
GTE and Kodak.
And I remember thinking
I am in the epicentre
of the intelligence
industry right now.
I mean the line
is not just blurring
it just not
there any more.
And tome it
it spoke volumes
as to how
industry and government were
consulting with each other
and working
with each other.
As 34 nations of the western
hemisphere gathered
to draft a far reaching
trade agreement
one that would lay
the groundwork
to privatize every resource
and service imaginable
thousands of people
from hundreds
of grassroots organizations
joined to oppose it.
Canada's top
business lobbyists
and its chief trade
representative
discount the dissent
in the streets.
For them the Americas
800 million citizens
speak with one voice.
I'm inside and
this is all outside.
That's the way it is.
What do you think when
you look at this?
Well I mean I think
that it's too bad
that this has
this has erupted.
Does the ranted to be some
measure of accountability?
Yes
And I think the business
community recognizes that.
But that accountability
is in the marketplace
it's with
their shareholders.
It's with the public perception
and the public image
that they are projecting.
If companies don't do what
they should be doing
they're going to be
punished in the marketplace
and that's not what
any company wants.
There's a new market.
These guys and
gals aren't out there
because governments
putting gun to their head.
Or because they've
suddenly read a book
about transcendental meditation
and global morality.
My inner voice says
honour my inner child
Mine says love everyone
My inner voice says
Id like a Wendy's
Bacon mushroom melt
They're there because
they understand.
The market requires
them to be there.
That's their competitive
advantage to be there.
I'm listening
to your concerns.
I worry about climate.
I worry about pollution.
I do not have all
the answers to this
but we are prepared to work
with you with society
with NGOs with
governments to address it.
So you're build the trust
so that you come back to
a new kind of trust
and then the ultimate
goal is then
to become
the corporation of choice.
He believes that almost half
our energy can one day come
from renewable sources.
He's been called
a dreamer and a crank.
And I've been
called a hippie.
And more recently
a project manager for Shell.
I ask myself
often times why
so many companies
subscribe to
corporate social responsibility.
I'm not sure it's because
they necessarily
want to be responsible
in an ultimate way
but because
they want to be
identified and seen
to be responsible.
But who am I to judge?
Who am I to judge?
It's better that they
belong than they not belong.
It's better that they make
some public profession
than the opposite.
Social responsibility
isn't a deep shift
because its
a voluntary tactic.
A tactic
a reaction to a certain
market at this point.
And as the corporation reads
the market differently
it can go back.
One day you
see Bambi
next day
you see Godzilla.
How do you define
socially responsible?
What business is it
of the corporation to decide
what's socially responsible.
That isn't
their expertise
that isn't what their
stockholders ask them to do.
So I think they're going
out of their range
and its certainly
is not democratic.
I don't really care
what the chairman
of General Motors thinks
is an appropriate
level of emissions
to come out the tailpipe
of General Motors automobiles.
He may have a lot
of scientists
he may be
a very good person
but I didn't elect
him to do anything.
He doesn't have any
power to speak for me.
These are decisions that must
be made by government
and not by corporations.
You take this to its
logical conclusion.
One would have an image
that we are in fact at this
the end of the world
this nigh.
And we are all
completely brainwashed
and there is
no space left.
And I don't believe
we're there yet.
And I think it's
really important
that we don't
overstate the case
and that we admit that
there are cracks
and fissures in all of these
corporate structures.
And sometimes when
a corporation is concentrating
on one particular project
they look the other way
and all kinds of interesting
things happen in the corner.
It is the case in every period
of history where injustice
based on falsehoods
based on taking away the right
and freedoms of people
to live and survive
with dignity
that eventually when you call
a bluff the tables turn.
Ultimately capital puts
its foot down somewhere.
And anywhere
it puts its foot down
it can be held
accountable.
Originally Wal-Mart and
Kathy Lee Gifford had said
why should we believe you that
children work in this factory?
What we didn't tell them
was that Wendy Dias
in the centre of the
picture was on a plane
to the United States.
This is Wendy Dias.
She comes
to the United States.
She's unstoppable.
Congress heard testimony
today from children who
testified they were exploited
by sweatshops overseas.
Kathy Lee Gifford
apologized to Wendy Dias
It was the most
amazing thing Id seen.
This powerful celebrity
leans over and says
Wendy please believe me
I didn't know these
conditions existed.
And now that I do I'm
going to work with you.
I'm going to work
with these other people
and it'll never
happen again.
And that night we signed
an agreement
with Kathy Lee Gifford.
I thought it would be
a relatively easy process
and it isn't.
As for every question
I have there seem to be
five questions that
come back tome.
As far as Wal-Mart
goes and Kathy Lee
pretty much everything returned
to sweatshop conditions
but because this was fought out
on television for weeks
this incident with Kathy Lee
Gifford actually
took the sweatshop issue
took every single part
of the country.
And so frankly
after that
there's hardly a single
person in this country
who doesn't know
about child labour
or sweatshops or
starvation wages.
So what wanted to do is
to look at the very roots
of the legal form that
created this beast
and wanted to think who
can hold them accountable.
They're not
graven in stone.
They can be dismantled.
And in fact most
states have laws
which require that
they be dismantled.
For too long now
giant corporations
have been allowed
to undermine democracy here
in the United States
and all over the world.
But today the Inn National
Lawyer's Guild
and 29 other groups
and individuals
are fighting back.
We are calling upon State
Attorney General Dan Lungren
to comply
with California law
and to revoke
the corporate charter
of the Union Oil
Company of California
for its repeated
and grievous offences.
This is the statute
that is well-known.
It has been used.
It can be used.
What this will mean
is the dissolution
of the Union Oil Company
of California
the sale of its assets
under careful court orders
to others who will carry
on in the public interest.
This is nothing more
than a smear campaign.
This company has been part
of California's economy
for over 100 years
thousands of jobs.
Doesn't mean it's never
made any mistakes
paid for those mistakes
but this demonizing
of accompany
I think I am in a time
warp or something
that I fell asleep
and woke up 50 years ago
and we heard that
kind of rhetoric.
Well we have a very very
broad set of people angry
very angry at
this corporation
well people from
the left of the spectrum
who don't produce anything
except hot air.
From its complicity
in unspeakable
human rights
violations overseas
against women gays labourers
and indigenous peoples
to its efforts to subvert
U.S. Foreign policy
and deceive the courts
the public and
its own stockholders
Unocal is emblematic
of corporate abuse
and corporate power
run amok
...is immoral.
Unocal cannot
do business in Burma
without supporting
that hopeless regime...
The curse for me has been
the fact that in making these
you know documentary films
I've seen that they
actually can impact change
so I'm just compelled
to just keep making them.
Yep that's me
doing what I do
All year long I give big
companies a hard time
but at Christmas time I like
to set aside my differences
and reach out to big business
like cigarette companies.
Deck the Halls with
boughs of holly...
fa la la la la
la la la
I went to Littleton
Colorado
where the Columbine
shooting took place
and I didn't
know this
but when I arrived I learned
what the primary job is
of the parents of the kids who
go to Columbine High School.
The number one job
in Littleton Colorado
They work
for Lockheed Martin
building weapons
of mass destruction.
But they don't
see the connect
between what
they do for a living
and what their
kids do at school
or did at school
And so I'm kind of you
know up on my high horse
thinking about this
and I thought you know
I said to my wife
we both are sons and
daughters of auto workers
in Flint Michigan.
There isn't a single one of
us back in Flint
any of us including us
who ever
stopped to think
this thing we do
for a living
the building
of automobiles
is probably
the single biggest reason
why the polar ice caps
are going to melt
and end civilization
as we know it.
There's no connect between
I'm just an assembler on an
assembly line building a car
which is good
for people and society
and it moves
them around.
But never stop to think
about the larger picture
and the larger responsibility
of what were doing.
Ultimately we have to
as individuals
accept responsibility
for our collective action
and the larger harm that it
causes you know in our world.
Today the first of two
historic town hall meetings
will get underway
in Arcata California
61 percent of Arcatans
voted in favour
of publicly discussing
whether democracy is even
possible with large corporations
...so much wealth
and power under law.
They also voted
to form a committee
to ensure democratic control
over corporations in Arcata.
Corporations are
not accountable
to the democratic
process.
That is what
this is about.
I don't want
to make decisions
about everything that goes
on in their corporation.
But I do have a
strong belief
that they don't need to be
held accountable to us.
If we don't like
certain products
if we don't like
Pepsi-Cola Bank of America
well if you don't
like what they do
don't use them.
That's the way I see
the peoples power is.
You have a lot
more money than me
You have more
votes than I do
If we use the model of boycott
and voting with your dollars
that's an
undemocratic situation.
What are we afraid of?
I mean are all the businesses
going to leave Arcata?
I don't think so.
And if they did
wed deal with it or
wed figure it out
or wed do
something different.
We're creative people.
I just don't see
why we are afraid.
If you think it's tough
making a decision
where to buy your
stuff today
how tough do you think
it is when there's only
one provider
and it's the state.
And by the way
you don't get to have
this little democracy forum
in those
communities either.
People that say that they
fear their govern meant
I really hope
that they understand
that they're allowed to
participate in their government
they're not allowed to
participate in anything
the corporations do.
So don't fear
the government.
Help it be the government
that you wont fear.
If this many people around
the country would do this
instead of watching
Super bowl Sunday
our nation would be
controlled by the people
not by the corporations.
...no more chain restaurants
in Arcata after
a long awaited decision...
Over the past decade
we have been
gaining ground.
And when I say we
I mean ordinary
people committed
to the welfare
of all humanity.
All people irrespective
of gender and class
and race
and religion.
All species
on the planet.
We managed to take
the biggest government
and one of the largest
chemical companies to court
on the case of Neemand
win a case against them.
W.R. Grace and the U.S.
Governments patent on Neem
was revoked by a case
we brought
along with the greens
of European parliament
and the international
organic agriculture movement.
We won because we
worked together.
We have overturned
nearly 99 percent
of the basmati patent
of Ricetek.
Again because we worked
as a world wide coalition
old women in Texas
scientists in India
activists sitting
in Vancouver
a little basmati
action group.
We stopped the third world
being viewed as the pirate
and we showed the corporations
were the pirate.
Look how little
it took for Gandhi
to work against the salt
laws of the British
where the British decided
the way they would
make their armies
and police forces bigger
is just
tax the salt.
And all that Gandhi did
was walk to the beach
pick up
the salt and say
nature gives it
for free.
Wanted it.
We've always made it.
We will violate
your laws.
We will continue
to make salt.
We've had a similar
commitment for
the last decade in India.
That any law that makes
it illegal to save seed
is a law not
worth following.
We will violate it because
saving seed is a duty
to the earth and
to future generations.
We thought it would
really be symbolic
It is more than symbolic.
It is becoming
a survival option.
Farmers who grow
their own seeds
save their own seeds
don't buy pesticides
have threefold
more incomes
than farmers who are locked
into the chemical treadmill
depending on
Monsanto and Cargill
We have managed
to create alternatives
that work for people.
There are many tools
for bringing back community.
But the importance is
not the tools
I mean there's litigation
there's legislation
there's direct action
there's education boycotts
social investment...
There's many many ways
to address issues
of corporate power.
But in the final analysis
what's really important
is the vision.
You have to have
abetter story
Do I know you well enough to
call you fellow plunderers?
There is not an industrial
company on earth
not an institution
of any kind
not mine not yours
not anyone's
that is sustainable.
I stand convicted by
me myself alone
not by anyone else
as a plunderer
of the earth
but not by our
civilizations definition.
By our civilization's
definition
I'm a captain
of industry.
In the eyes of many
a kind of modern-day hero.
But really really
the first industrial
revolution is flawed
it is not working.
It is unsustainable.
It is the mistake
and we must
move on to another
and better
industrial revolution
and get it right
this time.
When I think
of what could be
I visualize an
organization of people
committed to a purpose
and the purpose
is doing no harm.
I see accompany
that has severed the
umbilical cord to earth
for its raw materials
taking raw materials that
have already been extracted
and using them over
and over again
driving that process
with renewable energy.
It is our plan
it remains our plan
to climb Mount Sustainability
that mountain that is
higher than Everest
infinitely higher
than Everest
far more
difficult to scale.
That point at the top
symbolizing zero footprint...
So we've got
to undo a lot of things
in order to be smart enough
to do this really dangerous
and risky and difficult work
you know the best way
that we possibly can.
And that means people coming
together and learning
a whole lot of stuff that
we just don't know
that has been driven
out of the culture
driven out of the society
driven out of our minds.
That tome is the
most exciting thing.
That is happening
it's happening all
over the world now.
Sometimes it surprises me how
effective you can actually be.
After we beat the Gap
I walked past these
Gap stores
and I looked at them
and I think
my God there's like 2000 of
these stores across the country.
Look at all that concrete
look at the glass
look at all the staff people
look at all the clothing.
Look at that power
You can still reach
these companies.
You can still
have an effect.
We can change
the government.
That's the only way were
going tore design re think
re-constitute what capital
and property can do
Fifteen corporations would like
to control the conditions
of our life
and millions of people
are saying not only do
we not need you
we can do it better.
We are going to create systems
that nourish the earth
and nourish human beings.
And these are not
marginal experiments
they are the mainstay
of large numbers of
communities across the world.
That is where
the future lies.
You know I've always thought
it's very ironic
that I'm able to do all this
and yet what am I on?
I'm on networks.
I'm distributed by studios
that are owned by large
corporate entities.
Now why would they put me
out there when I am opposed
to everything that
they stand for?
And I spend my time
on their dime opposing
what they believe in.
Okay?
Well it's because they
don't believe in anything.
They put me on there because
they know that there's millions
of people that want to see
my film or watch the TV show
and so they're
going to make money.
And I've been able to get
my stuff out there
because I'm driving
my truck through
this incredible
flaw in capitalism
the greed flaw.
The thing that says the rich
man will sell you the rope
to hand himself with
if he think she can
make a buck off it
well I'm the rope.
I hope.
I'm part of the rope.
And they also believe that
when people watch my stuff
or maybe watch this film
or whatever
they think that
you know
well you know
well you know what
they'll watch this and
they wont do anything
because we've done such
a good job of numbing
their minds and
dumbing them down
you know they'll
never affect...
People aren't going
to leave the church
and go and do
something political.
They're convinced of that.
I'm convinced
of the opposite.
I'm convinced
that a few people
are going to leave
this movie theatre
or get up off the couch
and go and do something
anything and get this
world back in our hands.