Tobacco.org

• An unlikely warrior against Prop. 8  

For the better part of three decades, Fred Karger practiced the dark arts of public affairs consultancy, often on the side of corporations and conservative movements.

That makes him an unlikely warrior in the struggle for gay marriage and an especially improbable champion of full disclosure in politics. . . . now he is leading with his heart, employing the skills he gained as a Republican and corporate operative to seriously mess with foes of same-sex marriage. . . .

in 1988, Dolphin and Karger gathered victims of Willie Horton . . .

All through the 1990s, Karger was one of the main, albeit unseen, operatives in California for Philip Morris, U.S.A. Like a character out of "Thank You for Smoking," the satirical book and movie about a tobacco industry shill, Karger to this day calls the world's largest cigarette maker a great and generous client. It helped pay for his Laguna Beach home with its ocean view

Karger became expert at shaping "coalitions" and "grassroots movements." Astroturf, it's called. . . .

Karger's efforts are directly relevant to the Proposition 8 lawsuit pending before U.S. District Judge Morrison C. England Jr. in Sacramento. . . .

In the Sacramento case, Bopp is challenging California's law requiring public disclosure of the identities of donors who give to initiative campaigns. . . .

One was Proposition 188 of 1994, an initiative that would have overturned California's landmark legislation banning smoking in restaurants and public buildings.

It led in early polls, probably because its consultants claimed it would restrict smoking in certain public buildings. Its goal, in fact, was the opposite. Support withered after news reporters, myself included, documented that Philip Morris was the main funder.

As for the consultant on the campaign - well, it was Karger's Dolphin Group. That was then,

Jump to full article »

Tobacco producers excluded from Pension Fund 

"When the Graver Committee proposed the current ethical guidelines, there was debate on whether to exclude tobacco producers from the Fund. Under some doubt, it was decided that tobacco should not be excluded. After the Graver Committee submitted its recommendation, there have been international and national developments through the entry into force of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and the tightening of the Norwegian Tobacco Act. We have taken these changes on board and believe - amongst others in light of the consultative input in connection with the evaluation of the ethical guidelines - that it is timely to exclude tobacco from the Fund. It is important that the ethical guidelines reflect at all times what can be considered to be commonly held values of the owners of the Fund," says Minister of Finance Sigbjorn Johnsen.

In Report No. 20 to the Storting (Paarliament) on the Management of the GPFG, the Ministry proposed excluding tobacco producers from the Fund. The move was supported by the Storting. The specific delimitation of the tobacco criterion was described in the National Budget for 2010. The recommendation was made in line with this.

Jump to full article »

Norway-Global gives up tobacco 

The Ministry of Finance has excluded 17 tobacco-producing companies from the investment universe of the Government Pension Fund – Global, and there is the possibility that still more could be removed.

The decision to begin excluding tobacco producers from the fund was first announced in April 2009, following a review of the existing ethical guidelines to the fund. The ministry claimed an international convention on tobacco control and a tightening of the Norwegian Tobacco Act meant earlier doubts about removing these companies had been resolved. (See earlier IPE article: Norway global to exclude tobacco and target environment)

Sigbjørn Johnsen, minister of finance, said: “We have taken these changes on board and believe – in light of the consultative input in connection with the evaluation of the ethical guidelines – that it is timely to exclude tobacco from the fund. It is important that the ethical guidelines reflect at all times what can be considered to be commonly held values of the owners of the fund.”

Jump to full article »

Norway Excludes 17 Tobacco Companies From Oil Fund (Update4)  

Norway excluded 17 tobacco companies, including British American Tobacco Plc and Philip Morris International Inc., from its sovereign wealth fund based on ethical guidelines.

Altria Group Inc., Japan Tobacco Inc., Reynolds American Inc., Swedish Match AB and Imperial Tobacco Group Plc also were excluded and the shares have been sold, the Finance Ministry said today. The 2.6 trillion krone ($456 billion) fund bases its investment on ethical rules encompassing human rights, weapons manufacturing and the environment. The tobacco exclusion was proposed in April as part of an overhaul of the guidelines.

“It’s timely to exclude tobacco,” Finance Minister Sigbjoern Johnsen said in a statement. “It’s important that the ethical guidelines reflect at all times what can be considered to be commonly held values of the owners of the fund.”

Jump to full article »

Tobacco producers excluded from Government Pension Fund Global  

The Ministry of Finance has decided to exclude 17 companies that produce tobacco from the Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG), based on a recommendation from the Fund’s Council on Ethics. The divestment of shares in these companies has now been completed.

“When the Graver Committee proposed the current ethical guidelines, there was debate on whether to exclude tobacco producers from the Fund. Under some doubt, it was decided that tobacco should not be excluded. After the Graver Committee submitted its recommendation, there have been international and national developments through the entry into force of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and the tightening of the Norwegian Tobacco Act. We have taken these changes on board and believe – amongst others in light of the consultative input in connection with the evaluation of the ethical guidelines – that it is timely to exclude tobacco from the Fund. It is important that the ethical guidelines reflect at all times what can be considered to be commonly held values of the owners of the Fund,” says Minister of Finance Sigbjørn Johnsen.

Jump to full article »

Recommendation of the Council on Ethics (PDF) 

In its Government Whitepaper no. 20 (2008-2009), the Ministry of Finance proposed that tobacco companies should be excluded from the investment universe of the Government Pension Fund Global. The proposition was supported by Stortinget (the Parliament).

In line with this, the Ministry has changed the Fund’s ethical guidelines to the effect that companies which produce tobacco are to be excluded from the Fund.

The Council on Ethics has reviewed the companies in the Fund which are classified as tobacco producers and thus subject to exclusion based on the new criterion. . . .

In its letter, the Ministry writes that, as stated in the Government Whitepaper no. 20 (2008- 2009), this new criterion for exclusion is based on the production of tobacco, not on the sale of tobacco products. Also, the criterion is limited to the production of tobacco products themselves, not to additives or ingredients used in the production of tobacco products.

The Council will therefore issue recommendations on companies which cultivate and process tobacco, and exclusion from the Fund will be recommended for all companies which manufacture products made from tobacco. Production of any form of tobacco product, regardless of its intended use, will form the basis for exclusion. . . .

2 “Altria Group's operating companies include Philip Morris USA, U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Company, John Middleton and Ste. Michelle Wine Estates. Our tobacco company brand portfolios consist of successful and well-known brand names such as Marlboro, Copenhagen, Skoal and Black & Mild. . . .

5 Recommendation

Based on the above, the Council on Ethics recommends that the companies

Alliance One International Inc., Altria Group Inc., British American Tobacco BHD, British American Tobacco Plc., Gudang Garam tbk pt., Imperial Tobacco Group Plc., ITC Ltd., Japan Tobacco Inc., KT&G Corp, Lorillard Inc., Philip Morris International Inc., Philip Morris Cr AS., Reynolds American Inc., Souza Cruz SA, Swedish Match AB, Universal Corp VA, and Vector Group Ltd.

be excluded from the Government Pension Fund Global.

Jump to full article »

• UPDATE 1-Norway drops tobacco producers from wealth fund 

Norway has dropped 17 tobacco companies, including top cigarette makers like Altria, Lorillard, Philip Morris and British American Tobacco (BAT), from its $450 billion wealth fund for ethical reasons.

The fund, which invests the Nordic nation's oil and gas wealth in foreign stocks and bonds to save for future generations, holds more than 1 percent of all global stocks.

The central bank-managed fund follows ethical guidelines set by the government and, in the past, has excluded companies that produce nuclear arms or cluster munitions, damage the environment or abuse human or workers' rights. . . .

"A rule has been adopted that in principle will exclude all production of tobacco, regardless of the percentage of business represented by tobacco production," the finance ministry said on Tuesday, adding more companies not classified in tobacco-maker indexes .TOB but which make smoking products may be excluded.

"The divestment of shares in these companies has now been completed," the finance ministry said.

Jump to full article »

• Big tobacco kicked big bucks into Utah politics 

Big tobacco companies contributed $67,000 to Utah office holders and their political action committees in 2009, as lawmakers wrangle over whether to nearly triple the state's cigarette tax.

Many elected officials in Utah -- including Gov. Gary Herbert and Senate President Michael Waddoups -- refuse contributions from alcohol and tobacco companies.

But more than a third of legislators did receive money from Altria Client Services Inc. and Reynolds American Inc. . . .

"Just personally, it concerns me that the money [legislators] receive came from the poison these folks sold and I wish they were a little more discrete about accepting it," said Michael Siler, government relations director for the Utah chapter of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network.

Senate Majority Leader Sheldon Killpack, who received $1,500 last year from Altria, said he has no problem taking the money and disclosing it, but it doesn't affect his votes.

"If you can't look at somebody straight in the face and take their money and vote according to your conscience, you probably shouldn't take the money," Killpack said.

Waddoups said he no longer accepts contributions from tobacco companies, after constituents voiced objections. However, the Senate Leadership Political Action Committee, which Waddoups and other members of Senate leadership lead, received a total of $14,000 from Altria and Reynolds. . . .

Sen. Allen Christensen will once again sponsor legislation this year that would raise Utah's cigarette tax to $2 per pack . . .

Christensen said there is overwhelming public support for the bill, but he knows the tobacco companies will come after the bill with lobbyists and campaign money.

Jump to full article »

BAKER: Tobacco Lobbyists 

Millions of people around the country have been treated to the anti-debt ads run by one-time tobacco industry lobbyist Richard Berman. Mr. Berman, who has also worked to thwart minimum wage increases and managed to get on the opposite side of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, is now working alongside the Wall Street types who wrecked the economy.

Wall Streeters, like billionaire fund manager Peter Peterson, want to use the government debt burden created by the collapse of their credit bubble as an excuse to slash Social Security and Medicare. Therefore television viewers are being treated to an expensive ad campaign telling us that "debt stinks." . . .

That may not sound fair, but what else should we expect from the tobacco lobbyist/Wall Street gang?

So watch carefully for these folks. They have lots of money and they are prepared to use it to buy influence in Congress.

Jump to full article »

• EDITORIAL: The doubt industry 

The tobacco companies hired one of the world's largest public relations firms, Hill and Knowlton, to design a PR campaign to convince people that smoking was not dangerous. The firm helped set up a organization called the Council For Tobacco Research (CTR) that would produce science favorable to the tobacco industry and call into question any independent, unfavorable research.

CTR's work in delaying and reducing regulation of tobacco products was outlined in a recent book, "Doubt is Their Product: How Industry's Assault on Science Threatens Your Health," by David Michaels, the epidemiologist at George Washington University who is President Obama's nominee to head the Occupational Health and Safety Administration.

Michaels wrote that Hill & Knowlton's strategy was simple. . .

Hill & Knowlton's strategies for Big Tobacco worked so well that manufacturers of asbestos, lead, vinyl chloride, dioxin and other products shown by science to be hazardous to our health employed them to great effect. A new "science for hire" industry was born to generate misleading information and false controversy. The goal? To protect profits.

And so it goes with climate change.

When this much money and this much effort is spent to deny the validity of scientific fact on an issue of global importance, it may explain why so little action has been taken against the greatest environmental crisis the world has ever known and why the United States is seen as part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

Jump to full article »

The [tobacco] industry understood that the public is in no position to distinguish good science from bad. Create doubt, uncertainty and confusion. Throw mud at the anti-smoking research under the assumption that some of it is bound to stick. And buy time, lots of it, in the bargain.
David Michaels, the epidemiologist at George Washington University who is President Obama's nominee to head OSHA, writing about Hill & Knowlton's tobacco strategy in his book "Doubt is Their Product: How Industry's Assault on Science Threatens Your Health."

Funding by tobacco companies examined 

One year ago this month, Stanford's Faculty Senate rejected a resolution that would have banned faculty from conducting research sponsored by tobacco companies. Though the presence of tobacco-sponsored research on campus dwindled considerably even before the ban was considered, large sums of tobacco money have been granted to Stanford researchers over the years, and the issue of tobacco industry sponsorship remains controversial.

THE HISTORY OF TOBACCO FUNDING

In March 2008, the Philip Morris External Research Program (PMERP) — one of the principal sources of tobacco industry research grants in the nation — disbanded after nearly eight years in operation. John Cooke, professor of cardiovascular medicine at the School of Medicine, received funding from the PMERP for five years, obtaining more than $800,000 to research the effects of nicotine on blood vessel development.

In order to argue against the proposed ban on tobacco industry-sponsored research that was under consideration in the Faculty Senate, Cooke broke ties with the Philip Morris company in spring of 2007. . . .

Proctor claimed that a major cause of the defeat of the funding ban in the Faculty Senate was the administration's outcry against the resolution. During the debates, Provost John Etchemendy and President John Hennessy expressed opposition to the resolution on the grounds that it would impede on academic freedom and set dangerous precedents for other areas of corporate research sponsorship.

"The Senate voted down the proposal after lively debate and the expressed opposition from the Provost and President to such restrictions on research funding," Switzer said. "The main argument against the proposal was where to draw the line regarding sources of research support — oil companies? Foreign governments? Coal companies? Drug companies? etc."

Proctor dismissed what he saw as "slippery slope" arguments by pointing to bans on tobacco-sponsored research at Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Emory and other universities that have not resulted in a loss of academic freedom or affected other areas of research.

Neither Cooke, Switzer, nor McDevitt said they were aware of anyone on campus who is currently conducting any research sponsored by the tobacco industry.

Jump to full article »

• ADONIS: Tobacco companies: could you work for one?  

In a brilliant Good Weekend article back in September, award-winning Fairfax journalist, Jane Cadzow, spent a day at the headquarters of Australia's largest tobacco company, British American Tobacco Australia, for just one reason: to discover what possesses people to work for a company whose products are loathed by the public.

She saw portraits of employees in the building's foyer with quotes that describe why each person enjoys working there. "All my heart and mind needs are met," says one, seemingly ignoring the damage cigarettes cause to both the heart and the mind. "It makes me happy and alive," says another, unlike its customers, 40 of whom cease being happy and alive in Australia every day due to their smoking addiction.

I asked Anne Edwards, the Director of External Communications for Philip Morris International, to share with me the reasons why people work there. "People work for Philip Morris International because we are a global leader in the FMCG industry, with a diverse and international work environment, excellent professional development opportunities, attractive rewards programs and a strong track record of success," she said.

To be frank, that's pretty much what you'd find word-for-word on the unimaginative Careers page of almost every employer's website these days, so it still doesn't answer the question: why a tobacco company? . . .

Personally, I couldn't work for (or with) a tobacco company. It just doesn't sit well with me morally, although in fairness, polls consistently show that journalism isn't exactly the most respected profession, either. Nonetheless, writing a business article is aligned with my values, but playing a part in the sale of a poisonous product, is not.

It's perhaps a little unfair to be singling out the tobacco industry when there are other companies making products that are damaging as well, such as gun manufacturers which are life-destroying, junk food confectioners which are health-destroying, and producers of mind-rotting reality television which are soul-destroying. Regardless, there's a certain stigma attached to the tobacco industry that the others are yet to attract. Why is that?

Could you ever work for a tobacco company? If you're a small business owner, have you - or would you - ever provide services to a cigarette maker?

Jump to full article »

Outrage after tobacco company nominated 

Anti-smoking groups say they are outraged at the inclusion of British American Tobacco (BAT) in a best workplace competition.

BAT's participation in the JRA Best Workplace Awards, where it was a finalist in the small to medium workplace category, was a cynical corporate social responsibility stunt, said Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) director Ben Youdan. . . .

JRA managing director John Robertson said BAT was a finalist based on its employee feedback.

"The selection process does not involve any subjective judgment or contribution by JRA," he said.

It was not JRA's place to make a value judgment on the business activities of any of our participants, he said.

Jump to full article »

• Ethical Corporation: Nestle, British American Tobacco, Shell and AWE to join 100+ other multinationals to discuss their CR and sustainability reporting and communications in London in November  

The CR Reporting and Communications Summit (http://www.ethicalcorp.com/reporting) is the largest gathering in Europe on this topic. For two days in late November, many of the world's biggest companies will gather in London to debate and discuss the future of corporate responsibility reporting.

The Marriott hotel in Swiss Cottage will play host to 18 individual workshops, where over 30 of Europe's leading companies will present their own CR/sustainability reporting and communications strategies.

Julia King, Vice-President of CR at GlaxosmithKline will demonstrate how the pharmaceutical giant embeds sustainability reporting throughout the company's many offices in the second plenary session of the first day.

Jump to full article »

120000 Lives a Year 

Video highlights one of the most urgent health challenges of the 21st Century, from the history of paid product placement to the May, 2004 U.S. Senate hearing, scientific research confirming the problem, growing youth activism, and the reasonable, effective four-step Smoke Free Movies solution endorsed by leading health groups.

Jump to full article »