This from: Inside EPA Weekly Report Vol.21, no.37-September 15,
2000
But first an editorial comment. This leaked anti-environmental
Sony document should not come as a surprise, but I'll take a stab
at it why it may. Greenwashing, outright violence, slap suits -- all
sorts of anti-environmental "stuff" -- has been going on for decades.
This is nothing new. Recently "partnerships" between large and
small non-profits and polluters have come into vogue. Maybe it
comes as a surprise to some because they actually believe that
these can and will be partnerships that lead to a reduction in
toxics, corporate responsibility, and the like. I hope this serves as
a wake up call to the hard fact that corporate decisions are still
based in the pure and simple logic of economics and nothing can
be allowed to stand that affects the bottom line in a negative way.
An example of one partnership ad:
http://www.environmentaldefense.org/ads/cma.html
The leaked Sony document in question may be downloaded from:
http://www.iwpextra.com/ee00708.pdf
INDUSTRY GOES ON GLOBAL OFFENSIVE AGAINST ENVIRONMENTALISTS
Targeting funding, internet activities
Several industry sectors have begun efforts to counteract recent
gains by environmentalists on international and trade issues,
ranging from preemptive attempts to block charitable foundations
from funding environmentalists to the use of internet "intelligence"
collection agencies to track and potentially cripple activists efforts
on a global scale, according to industry officials and confidential
industry strategy documents.
Environmentalists say the new initiatives constitute an
unprecedented offensive on their ability to engage in the debate
over the effect of international trade, as well as economic and
political globalization, on the environment.
Industry officials by and large defend their efforts, saying that the
measures are legal and necessary in order to keep track of the
numerous campaigns environmentalists have launched in the international
arena.
According to documents obtained by Inside EPA, Sony Co. this
summer prepared an "action plan" for counteracting the efforts of
several domestic and international environmental groups--including
Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and Silicon Valley Toxics
Coalition. The plan includes such activities as "pre-funding
intervention" and creates a "detailed monitoring and contact
network" to track the activities of these groups. A copy of the
strategy is available on our online document service, IWP Extra.
See page 2 for details.
Sony presented the document during a July technology sector
meeting in Brussels on the so-called "WEE" directive--a European
Union proposal that would phase out a raft of toxic substances in
electronics and would require manufacturers to take back their
products for recycling once their useful consumer life is over. The
WEE initiative has been heavily lobbied by several U.S. environmental
groups, but bitterly opposed by most multinational electronics firms.
The Sony paper and sources close to the issue say the monitoring
network would employ one of the dozens of new internet
"intelligence" agencies --such as London-based Infonics PLC--that
monitor chat rooms, e-mail lists, electronic bulletin boards, online
news services, newsgroups and other sources of public information for
specific data requested by a company or industry group. This information
includes press releases and news stories, discussions of particular issues
and campaigns, and overall strategy, and is typically compiled in digest
form for subscribers to the service.
Although sources with Infonics were not available for comment, the
company has been involved in international environmental issues in
the past, most notably when it hired Royal Dutch Shell, Inc. to
polish its corporate image after the Nigerian military executed a
local environmentalist who was fighting to require Shell to address
contamination.
An industry official says "pre-funding intervention" means providing
groups with industry data prior to the beginning of their campaigns
to ensure "they have good information" about company products and
practices. But an observer familiar with industry efforts says it likely refers to a
growing movement in the business community to take industry
problems with activists' agendas directly to donors, charitable foundations and
companies that sponsor the environmental organizations, in an
effort to stall the campaigns before they even commence.
Sources say the Sony paper only highlights what some contend is
a growing movement in the industry to try and cripple
environmentalists and other activists organizations because of their
demands on trade issues. Sources also point to a new website--
truthabouttrade.com--that was reportedly set up by the
agribusiness sector in response to last year's protests at the World Trade Organization
(WTO)meeting in Seattle. The organizers of the site have collected a list
of environmental groups that took part in the protests, their sponsors,
and a list of "myths" about trade and environment and their rebuttals--
including charges that that global warming is not a real phenomenon and
that the government should not protect certain species from extinction due
to human activities.
Environmentalists say the site is a clear attempt to intimidate
charitable foundations into not providing the groups with funds.
And while the groups' site stops short of actually calling for the
foundations to halt funding for these groups, it does say "we intend
to shine a very bright light on these groups, and hold them
accountable for their actions."
Activists say the efforts could set a dangerous precedent, and warn
of an industry "Big Brother" mentality that seems to be becoming
more prevalent in the business community. One observer says the
Sony strategy also appears to be the first example of a
coordinated, international effort by business to monitor and
counteract activists' efforts.
Several sources say that prior to the Seattle demonstrations, much
of the industry did not view environmentalist working on trade
issues as a threat. But after protesters--led in large part by
environmental and labor groups--successfully shut down the WTO
meetings and their subsequent wins in the realm of public opinion,
many in the business community have begun to take notice and
are actively seeking a way to address the situation.
+++++++++++++++++++++
Michael R. Meuser,
Environmental Sociologist
[email protected]
