Financial times pulled anti-Shell ad by Amnesty

[Lars77]

Source: Planet Green

Amnesty had paid for an advertisement to run in the latest issue of Financial Times that was supposed to be released the day of Shell's annual general meeting, but Amnesty learned at the last minute it was not going to run.

This is the same AGM where development of tar sands was also discussed and, to the dismay of just about everyone outside of Shell executives and shareholders, was allowed to continue. Amnesty received an email from FT the night before saying the magazine was not going to run the ad. If they gave a more elaborate explanation, Amnesty didn't make that public.

According to Amnesty, the advertisement focused on the "appalling human rights record of Shell in Nigeria. It compared the company’s $9.8bn profits with the consequences of pollution caused by the oil giant for the people of the Niger Delta."

In addition to blatant human rights abuses and the company's responsibility for the death of a Nigerian activist, Shell has implemented poor practices in the Niger Delta that have allowed oil spills to pollute water sources local communities rely on for drinking, and compromised the quality of agricultural land that they use for farming.

Read more: http://planetgreen.discovery.com/work-connect/why-did-financial-times-pull-amnesty-internationals-ad-targeting-shell.html

[ShamelessHussy]

1. they all stick together

gansters

[scentopine]

2. Media and politicians all work for Fortune 500, citizens have no representation

unless the interest of the citizen intersects with the interests of the corporation.

Starting with death of fairness doctrine and continuing with media monopolies we are becoming simple servants to Fortune 500, politicians exist to keep us under control.

[Downwinder]

3. Meanwhile, back in the Mississippi delta . . . .

[SecularMotion]

4. If corporations claim advertising as "free speech"

it should be illegal to deny that same "freedom" to anyone else.