AudreyFilmAnnotation7+The+Corporation

Sustainability Problems Film Annotation: “The Corporation” ** “The Corporation” is written by Joel Bakan, directed by Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott, and released in 2003 The premise of “The Corporation” is that corporations have grown in size in power and are inadvertently and consciously wrecking harms on society. The film assumes that corporations are the organization with the greatest power in today’s society. It compares their power to religions and governments and asserts that corporations now triumphs as the central and uniting body in society. Experts attest that legal changes throughout history can be attributed with giving corporations power. Corporations have the legal status of a person and they also are established with the sole objective of increasing their profit.
 * Audrey Newcomb

Besides these legal problems, “The Corporation” implies several other factors that create unsustainable corporations. Milton Friedman talked about externalities and a commodities trader stated he cannot consider environmental concerns until they become a commodity. Therefore a pricing structure that does take into account environmental and human harms aids corporations in exploiting humans and environment. Even when corporations are causing damage they cannot register that a problem is occurring as long as they continue to fulfill their main objective of making more money. The size of corporations has also allowed corporations to evolve into an evil entity. The issue of size also overlaps with global scope. If a corporation is very large the chief executives will have little responsibility and knowledge about what is happening. Even when executives would like to own a moral organization it can be difficult when the organization is so large. The website of “The Corporation” features a compelling story of [|Sir Mark Moody-Stuart] and how even though he is willing to hold his business to stricter moral standards, there are wheels turning that he cannot stop (if you click on the link, read under the section of “Monstrous Obligations”). I know that non-profit service organizations are subject to external audits and a set of standards called SAS 70 are used to review the processes of non-profit organizations. Private corporations must not be subject to external audits of their everyday processes. I also know that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act holds executives of “all publicly registered companies” accountable for their companies expenses ("Sarbanes-Oxely Act of 2002"). This law was put into place to prevent people from losing money when publicly traded companies falsely reported expenses.

Why can’t similar laws be put into place holding executives accountable for the conditions that all their employees work in? Lives are more important than money. To a corporation money is more important, but the Sarbanes-Oxley Act is not protecting the money of the company, it is protecting the money of investors (which perhaps is really just protecting the money of rich people). I have the impression that the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was created to protect the public from accounting scams. There are more important scams that corporations perpetrate that the public should be protected from. More important scams include abusing the patent right, hiding health information from consumers, and abusing workers. Abusing patent rights is hard to regulate though because the laws surrounding copyrights and patents allow corporations to abuse them. Judicial decisions allow corporations to clone everything but a full human life and patent the discovery of all human genes. There should be a reexamination of the right of company to own the knowledge of specific human genes as well as processes of cloning life. Hiding health information from consumers is linked to the corporation’s sole objective of making profit and believing “more” and “faster” are inherent to progress, but it is also linked to honest reporting. “The Corporation” featured a story of Fox News reporters who were sued for trying to bring to light the story of Monsanto injecting cows with hormones despite the hormones’ definite health consequences for the cows and humans. By the end of the reporters’ trial with Monsanto it was established that “falsifying news is not against the law.” Factual news is a sustainability problem. One reason abuse of workers by corporations is difficult to regulate is because of the conflict between allegiance to nation-states versus the world community. Even though sweatshops are illegal in the U.S., companies can circumvent regulators by not reporting illegal workers and the conditions they are subject to ("Garment Sweatshops in the Unites States"). It is difficult to protect workers in a different country because the U.S. cannot regulate working conditions for people that are not U.S. citizens. We could establish a national paradigm that denounces exploiting any human life, but the issue of national allegiance stands in the way.

One of the most compelling examples in “The Corporation” was Kathy Lee Gifford’s line of clothes. Her clothes donned a tag that said a portion of the profits from the sale of the garment would go to a children’s charity. The garment was made by young girls are overworked in foreign sweatshops. It was a very paradoxical situation that also received media coverage and brought to light the issue of sweatshops for some people.

Originally I was not convinced by the film’s comparison of corporations to religions and monarchies. The film’s analogy made corporations seem to be the core and sole source for society’s problem. This is not true, and I also want to believe that corporations cannot hold as much power as a religion or government, but in some cases they do.

This film is best suited for those who work in the corporate world or have a high position in a corporation because I think they would have a strong reaction to the film. The film asks viewers to imagine how greater community involvement can repel growing corporations and help reclaim the balance between a person and the corporations. In a town meeting in Arcata, CA, one man voiced his concern that dissent of and reducing the power of corporations would lead to socialism. This movie tried to point out there needs to be a balance of which goods are owned by the community and which are privatized. The movie advocated that communities should own their own water and the seeds that are produced by their local plants. Viewers will change the way they think about environmental problems when they realize that organizations that are guilty of “environmental” problems are negatively affecting people as well. For some viewers, this realization could elevate the priority of environmental problems in their life.

The intervention method suggested by this film consists of disagreeing with corporate involvement in your community, gaining community support, and as a group attempting to overturn a corporation’s control.

It is evident that corporations damage our environment. The only thing that could have been added to “The Corporation” is more evidence that privatizing resources results in environmental destruction. It doesn’t seem right that the Bolivian people could have been charged for collecting rain water, but how would Betchel affect the water or other aspects of the environment? A greater understanding of water privatization would have benefitted me. In addition to water privatization, I would like to learn more about Dr. Vandana Shiva; she seems like an intelligent and inspirational person.

Interesting Links: [|Funny Article about Evil Corporations] [|Lecture about Copyrights by Lawrence Lessig]

References: "8 Myths about Sweatshops." //The Nationsl Mobilization Against Sweatshops//. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar 2010. <[]>. "Garment Sweatshops in the Unites States." //The Budget Babe//. N.p., 10 Sep 2007. Web. 11 Mar 2010. <[]>. Lessig, Lawrence. "Free Culture." //O'Reilly Policy Devcenter//. N.p., 15 Aug 2002. Web. 11 Mar 2010. <[]>. Mokhiber, Russell, and Robert Weissman. "Corporate Spooks." //Common Dreams//. N.p., 06 Mar 2006. Web. 11 Mar 2010. <[]>. Saccardo, Tim. "Evil Corporations that Run your Life." //Madatoms//. N.p., 26 Jan 2010. Web. 11 Mar 2010. <[]>. "Sarbanes-Oxley Act." //Wikipedia//. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar 2010. <[]>. "Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ." N.p., 03 Mar 2010. Web. 11 Mar 2010. <[]>. //Statement on Auditing Standards (SAS) No. 70//. N.p., 03 Mar 2010. Web. 11 Mar 2010. <[]>. "Synopsis." //The Corporation//. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar 2010. <[]>. none      **Save**PreviewText Editor Help · About · Blog · Terms · Privacy · [|**Support**] · **Upgrade**