All language subtitles for The Corporation - Indowebster-English

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 uh, reveal
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 30years

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 we need.

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 we need 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
the profit motivation here

because these people

there�s no such
thing as enough.

And I always
counter point 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 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 we'd 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 any more 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 DDT

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 BST
results in unnecessary 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 awash 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 a cost 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 50,000 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.

I�m 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
thinks he�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
unlimited 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 every one 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

sometimes if you had a
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 CEO
you cannot do that

Layoffs have 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 at our 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-Stuarts
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.

I�ve posed as
an investment banker.

I�ve posed as a
venture capitalist.

I�ve 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.

I�ve 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.

I�m 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 21years

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.

I�ve 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 BB 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 kids nag.

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.

I�m 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 a social
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.

I�m 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

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
to me 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 fa�ade.

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 a company 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
bygone 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.