Environmental Activist Forcibly Removed from Chevron-Sponsored Event in Oakland for Mocking the Company's 'News' Website

Re-posted from John Geluardi of the East Bay Express on April 16, 2014

Security guards forcibly removed Paul Paz y Miño, an employee of the environmental group Amazon Watch, from a Chevron-sponsored event today in Oakland because he was carrying flyers that he said he had planned to distribute outside the building after the program. When Paz y Miño, who had paid $75 for a ticket to the public event, refused to leave, guards forcibly removed him.

Called the “Illuminating Ideas: ENERGY & Sustainability Summit,” the economic development event was held at the Oakland Marriott. It was organized by the Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce and primarily sponsored by Chevron. PG&E, Bank of America, and Merrill Lynch were also sponsors. The event offered several panel discussions on green infrastructure, energy smart cities, and private and public partnerships. The keynote speaker was Jon Wellinghoff, the immediate past president of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Oakland Mayor Jean Quan was also a speaker at the event.

Paz y Miño had brought along numerous copies of a handout that mocked the Richmond Standard, an online “newspaper” that is operated by Chevron’s public relations firm and covers news in the city of Richmond where Chevron operates a large refinery. The publication has been criticized for being little more than a promotional newsletter for the multinational corporation, which has been widely criticized for a refinery explosion in 2012 that sent 15,000 people to the hospital complaining of respiratory problems. Chevron later pleaded guilty to six misdemeanor criminal charges and paid $2 million in fines related to the explosion.

In the Amazon Watch version of the newspaper were stories that mocked Chevron. Under a sub banner that reads “What Oakland’s Chamber of Commerce needs to know about the tactics of its “presenting sponsor,” was a story with the headline “Chevron creates its own news outlet for a poor city that it pollutes.”

Only one woman had noticed the flyers and asked Paz y Miño for one, which he gave her. But about twenty minutes after he arrived, several security guards came up to him and asked him to leave. According to
Paz y Miño, the guards said that “Amazon Watch was not welcomed at the event.” When Paz y Miño refused to leave, three security guards physically escorted him from the building.

Paz y Miño said he was convinced Chevron was behind his ejection and was not surprised by the action. “Chevron has been out to crush free speech in relation to its policies for years and now apparently opposing views are not even allowed in the room,” Paz y Miño said. “It’s outrageous. They want to crush any kind of open discussion or debate about their actions here or anywhere in the world.”

Dan Quigley, the director of the Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce issued a written statement about the incident claiming that Paz y Miño was forced to leave as a preemptive action. “We’re sorry to have asked a paying attendee to leave, and have reimbursed the cost of his ticket,” the statement read. “Previous actions by Amazon Watch in other venues and their social media messaging in advance of our conference raised out concern that this attendee (an employee of Amazon Watch) intended to be disruptive.”

Paz y Miño scoffed at the idea that he had any intention of being disruptive. “There was absolutely nothing that I did, or was there anything in our social media, that suggested Amazon Watch intended to be disruptive,” Paz y Miño said, adding that he has yet to receive reimbursement for his ticket.

Read More

Chevron's Thin Skin Exposed Again

Maria Ramos Refuses to Succumb To Oil Giant’s Strong-Arm Tactics

Maria Ramos of the Rainforest Action Network has long been a thorn in Chevron’s side over its Ecuador environmental disaster, considered the worst on the planet. Just how much so was recently captured on video.

As the director of the We Can Change Chevron initiative, Ramos recently attended the “Corporate Citizen Conference” of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. This was a platform for Chevron (one of the largest donors to the Chamber) to try to green wash its disastrous environmental record in Ecuador and to tout its “public partnerships” throughout the world. (Note: one “public partnership” Chevron never wants to talk about is how the company is in bed with Venezuelan strong man Hugo Chavez.)

Ramos had the courage to pose several questions to Chevron official Gary Fisher about the company’s “public partnership” in Ecuador that has left 1,400 people dead from cancer and thousands of others sick with cancer, skin disease, respiratory problems and other illnesses. From 1964 until 1990, Chevron dumped billions of gallons of toxic water and oil into the rainforest, destroying the environment and tainting the local water supply on which tens of thousands of people relied for their survival. The company has refused to take responsibility for the eco-disaster and has undertaken a legal battle to derail a 17-year-old lawsuit seeking damages.

Not surprisingly, security showed up and tried to silence Ramos, but she had none of it. Watch Ramos here as a beefy security guard tries to cover up the microphone while she poses a question.

Chevron of course has a history of suppressing the Free Speech rights of its critics. At its May annual meeting, Chevron conspired with the Houston police to have five shareholder critics arrested and charged with criminal trespassing. Chevron also refused to allow 20 people from Ecuador, Burma, Nigeria and the Philippines to attend the meeting, even though they had legitimate shareholder proxies. Read about this other “public partnership” here. The Chamber is now threatening to bill Rainforest Action Network $10,000 for attending the conference. Stay tuned for more.

Read More

NY Times: Media Companies Join Filmmaker in Opposing Chevron

This article appeared on the New York Times "ArtsBeat" blog yesterday:

Media Companies File Brief on Behalf of Filmmaker in Chevron Case

By DAVE ITZKOFF

A group of 13 media companies has filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of Joe Berlinger, the documentary filmmaker who is appealing a federal district court’s ruling that the oil company Chevron can subpoena the outtakes from his film “Crude.”

The brief, filed Tuesday in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, in Manhattan, by the lawyer Floyd Abrams, and which was joined by others, including NBC Universal, the Directors Guild of America, HBO and The New York Times Company, says the work of these companies “will be seriously jeopardized” by the district court’s decision and its effect on journalist’s privilege.

Last month, Judge Lewis A. Kaplan of Federal District court in Manhattan ruled that Mr. Berlinger would have to turn over more than 600 hours of footage from “Crude,” his documentary about the Ecuadorians who sued Texaco (now owned by Chevron), accusing it of contaminating their water. Chevron said Mr. Berlinger’s footage could be helpful to the company as it seeks to have the suit dismissed and pursues an international treaty arbitration related to the litigation.

The brief says the district court’s ruling “was fundamentally flawed” in its interpretation of the 1999 case Gonzales v. NBC, in which the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that even confidential materials can be released if they are likely to be relevant to a significant issue in the case and are not reasonably obtainable elsewhere.

The brief said:

a party seeking to compel production of such materials must make a somewhat less demanding showing than for confidential information — but a showing that is, nonetheless, still significantly more substantial than the burden on a litigant seeking ordinary garden-variety discovery.

Judge Kaplan’s ruling, the brief said, “effectively shifted the burden of alleged unfairness onto the filmmakers, rendering this circuit’s requirement of a relevance showing meaningless,” and “made it far too easy for Chevron to obtain far too much, precisely what Gonzales forbids.”

On May 21 Judge Denny Chin of the appellate court ordered a hearing on June 8 to consider a subpoena and stayed the subpoena until that hearing.

The friend-of-the-court brief can be found here. The 13 companies that joined it are ABC, The Associated Press, CBS Broadcasting, the Daily News, the Directors Guild of America, Dow Jones & Company, Gannett Company, Hearst Corporation, Home Box Office, the International Documentary Association, NBC Universal, The New York Times Company and The Washington Post.

Read More

LA Times Editorial: Chevron Should Be Prevented From Violating Journalist's Privilege

Chevron sues over 'Crude'

A documentary's unused footage, akin to reporters' notes, should be protected.

Journalism that serves society does not always spring from objectivity, nor is it always written from a distance. When Upton Sinclair exposed the conditions of Chicago's meat industry, he did so on assignment from a socialist newspaper. He went to work in grim stockyards and returned with "The Jungle." The result was a revolution in food safety and the founding of the Food and Drug Administration.

Sinclair's closeness to his story gave his journalism urgency and moral power. It was precisely the sort of work that deserves the greatest protection from corporate intrusion. That lesson, however, has been turned upside down by a New York federal judge who this week ordered a documentary filmmaker to turn over outtakes of his work to Chevron.

The man at the center of this important 1st Amendment battle is Joe Berlinger, a respected documentary filmmaker who launched a project in 2005 to chronicle a landmark lawsuit filed by Ecuadoran indigenous people seeking compensation for environmental damage. Berlinger's acclaimed documentary, "Crude," followed the case, focusing on the lawyers for the plaintiffs. Chevron, however, says several scenes reinforce the company's charge that those lawyers cooked up the case: In one, a lawyer for the plaintiffs meets with an expert witness hired by the government to estimate damages from oil in the Ecuadoran jungle; in another, a lawyer is shown meeting with the judge and remarking that such a meeting would be inconceivable in the United States but not in Ecuador, because there "this is how the game is played. It's dirty." Because just a fraction of Berlinger's footage made it into the final film, Chevron believes there was potentially more damaging material left on the cutting-room floor, so it sought to force Berlinger to hand over his outtakes.

Were the material in question notes gathered by a journalist in pursuit of a story, the journalist's privilege, which recognizes the societal benefit of allowing journalists to shield their unpublished notes, would almost certainly have protected it. So the issues were: Was Berlinger a journalist, and do the protections for notes extend to film outtakes? U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan sided with Berlinger on both points, concluding that the filmmaker covered a newsworthy event and disseminated his findings to the public — a fairly sound description of journalism in any form.

Nevertheless, noting that the journalist's privilege is a limited one, Kaplan ordered Berlinger to turn over the footage precisely because, paradoxically, Berlinger's close ties to the plaintiffs meant that he has material that Chevron is unable to get anyplace else. (Kaplan seems to have overlooked the presence of other witnesses in the filmed scenes.) Kaplan may be right that Berlinger has exclusive material, but forcing him to relinquish it turns the point of journalistic access on its head: If journalists must reveal what they learn but do not publish from those sources they cultivate most carefully, then sources will keep them at arms' length. This nation is better off because Sinclair was able to insinuate himself into Chicago's meatpacking plants; it will be better again if Berlinger prevails on appeal. And it will be better still when Congress passes a federal shield law that protects journalists and their sources.

Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times

Read More

Chevron Tries to Silence Critics of Its Ecuador Environmental Disaster

Chevron is exhibiting some awfully thin skin lately over its Ecuador environmental disaster.

A clear pattern is emerging where the company, its lawyers, and its public relations firms try to intimidate critics of its Ecuador problem into silence. Award-winning filmmaker Joe Berlinger, who recent made a movie documenting the company's abuses in Ecuador, is the latest victim. That has gotten Chevron on the bad side of prominent journalists and filmmakers such as Bill Moyers, Trudie Styler and Michael Moore.

Chevron has admitted to dumping billions of gallons of toxic waste into Ecuador's Amazon to cut costs, decimating indigenous groups and creating an outbreak of cancer that affects thousands of people. For years, the company has engaged in abusive litigation to evade accountability for a clean-up.

Unlike the BP disaster in the Gulf, Chevron (via its predecessor company Texaco) discharged this waste on purpose. And unlike BP, Chevron's executives have buried their heads in the sand and refused to accept responsibility for the clean-up.

The increased pressure on Chevron – 60 Minutes did a highly unflattering segment on the company recently – seems be taking a toll.

Take look at Chevron's attacks on Free Speech just in the past year:

• Filing frivolous lawsuits to "punish" critics: Chevron, via its new law firm Gibson Dunn, initiated a "malicious prosecution" lawsuit in a California federal court to punish a 75-year-old lawyer, Cristobal Bonifaz. Bonifaz had brought a separate lawsuit against Chevron on behalf of a handful of individuals for health claims related to the company's Ecuador disaster in San Francisco federal court. A federal judge turned the tables on Chevron, finding the Chevron action violated a California law that bars nuisance lawsuits designed to suppress Free Speech. The judge dismissed virtually all of Chevron's claims against Bonifaz. The California law (called Anti-SLAPP) used by the court against Chevron was created to prevent legal attacks brought to censor, intimidate and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of defending a frivolous lawsuit. The decision was a tremendous setback for Gibson Dunn, which has a reputation for being paid millions to protect companies like Chevron from being held accountable for their human rights abuses.

• Attempting to intimidate journalists and gain access to their files: Chevron recently launched an unprecedented legal attack on award-winning documentarian Joe Berlinger to force him to allow the company to rummage through 600 hours of video footage Berlinger shot for the documentary, CRUDE. The movie – which has won 22 awards from film festivals -- chronicles the struggle of the 30,000 residents of the Ecuadorian rainforest to hold Chevron accountable for systematically polluting their lands. Chevron's lawsuit prompted a group of filmmakers that includes 20 Academy Award winners and many more nominees to write an open letter in support of Berlinger stating that Chevron's effort "will have a crippling effect on the work of investigative journalists everywhere." Filmmaker Michael Moore has stated, "The chilling effect of this is, someone like me, if something like this is upheld, the next whistleblower at the next corporation is going to think twice about showing me some documents if that information has to be turned over to the corporation that they're working for."

• Barring critics from public events: At the Chevron-sponsored Houston Marathon, a team of runners was barred from participating in the event, and threatened with arrest, for attempting to distribute materials critical of Chevron's human rights record in Ecuador. The race manager told the runners that "higher ups at Chevron were freaking out." At the time, runner Maria Ramos stated: "It is sad that the Chevron Houston Marathon – which raises awareness and money for many important causes – would deny the rights of participants to appease a corporate sponsor that is clearly ashamed of its human rights record."
• Attempting to pressure news outlets to silence critics: Chevron has used pressure tactics to force major media outlets to prevent advertisements critical of the company from being published. Chevron responded to an ad campaign from the Rainforest Action Network by directing its lawyers and public relations firms to leverage the company's influence and demand that the New York Times and Washington Post pull the ads. Despite Chevron's complaints, the New York Times ran the advertisements. However, the Washington Post initially succumbed to Chevron's pressure and pulled the ads temporarily. Of course, the fact Chevron was contemporaneously paying for the publication of advertisements attacking its critics was of no small irony.

• Taking out advertisements attacking critics: Chevron has taken out multiple paid advertisements in Ecuador, in the United States, and across the internet accusing the Amazon community leaders suing Chevron of being liars, frauds, and con men. Chevron has also taken out ads attacking the independent court-appointed expert in Ecuador, the judge, and other participants in the lawsuit. The use of paid public advertisements to attack and intimidate court officials is unethical and would result in sanctions against the company's lawyers if it were done in the United States.

Chevron's "scorched earth" approach to its critics is pathetic, to say the least. But that's what happens when some of Big Oil's corporate leaders don't want to be reminded that they are responsible for the discharge of more than 18 billion gallons of toxic waste into the Amazon Rainforest.

But the facts are the facts. While we can understand Chevron's desire to forget about the mess it made in Ecuador, and to wish that its critics would go away, it's time for the company to stop trying to silence the opposition.

For more information, visit www.chevrontoxico.com.

#

Read More

Bill Moyers: Chevron's "Crude" Attempt to Suppress Free Speech

This article, by Bill Moyers and Michael Winship, appeared on The Huffington Post.

Chevron's "Crude" Attempt to Suppress Free Speech

Even as headlines and broadcast news are dominated by BP's fire-ravaged, sunken offshore rig and the ruptured well gushing a reported 210,000 gallons of oil per day into the Gulf of Mexico, there's another important story involving Big Oil and pollution -- one that shatters not only the environment but the essential First Amendment right of journalists to tell truth and shame the devil.

(Have you read, by the way, that after the surviving, dazed and frightened workers were evacuated from that burning platform, they were met by lawyers from the drilling giant Transocean with forms to sign stating they had not been injured and had no first-hand knowledge of what had happened?! So much for the corporate soul.)

But our story is about another petrochemical giant -- Chevron -- and a major threat to independent journalism. In New York last Thursday, Federal Judge Lewis A. Kaplan ordered documentary producer and director Joe Berlinger to turn over to Chevron more than 600 hours of raw footage used to create a film titled Crude: The Real Price of Oil.

Released last year, it's the story of how 30,000 Ecuadorians rose up to challenge the pollution of their bodies, livestock, rivers and wells from Texaco's drilling for oil there, a rainforest disaster that has been described as the Amazon's Chernobyl. When Chevron acquired Texaco in 2001 and attempted to dismiss claims that it was now responsible, the indigenous people and their lawyers fought back in court.

Some of the issues and nuances of Berlinger's case are admittedly complex, but they all boil down to this: Chevron is trying to avoid responsibility and hopes to find in the unused footage -- material the filmmaker did not utilize in the final version of his documentary -- evidence helpful to the company in fending off potential damages of $27.3 billion.

This is a serious matter for reporters, filmmakers and frankly, everyone else. Tough, investigative reporting without fear or favor -- already under siege by severe cutbacks and the shutdown of newspapers and other media outlets -- is vital to the public awareness and understanding essential to a democracy. As Michael Moore put it, "The chilling effect of this is, [to] someone like me, if something like this is upheld, the next whistleblower at the next corporation is going to think twice about showing me some documents if that information has to be turned over to the corporation that they're working for."

In an open letter on Joe Berlinger's behalf, signed by many in the non-fiction film business (including the two of us), the Independent Documentary Association described Chevron's case as a "fishing expedition" and wrote that, "At the heart of journalism lies the trust between the interviewer and his or her subject. Individuals who agree to be interviewed by the news media are often putting themselves at great risk, especially in the case of television news and documentary film where the subject's identity and voice are presented in the final report.

"If witnesses sense that their entire interviews will be scrutinized by attorneys and examined in courtrooms they will undoubtedly speak less freely. This ruling surely will have a crippling effect on the work of investigative journalists everywhere, should it stand."

Just so. With certain exceptions, the courts have considered outtakes of a film to be the equivalent of a reporter's notebook, to be shielded from the scrutiny of others. If we -- reporters, journalists, filmmakers -- are required to turn research, transcripts and outtakes over to a government or a corporation -- or to one party in a lawsuit -- the whole integrity of the process of journalism is in jeopardy; no one will talk to us.

In his decision, Judge Kaplan wrote that, "Review of Berlinger's outtakes will contribute to the goal of seeing not only that justice is done, but that it appears to be done." He also quoted former Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis' famous maxim that "sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants."

There is an irony to this, noted by Frank Smyth of the Committee to Protect Journalists.Brandeis "made his famous sunlight statement about the need to expose bankers and investors who controlled 'money trusts' to stifle competition, and he later railed against not only powerful corporations but the lawyers and other members of the bar who worked to perpetuate their power"

In a 1905 speech before the Harvard Ethical Society, Brandeis said, "Instead of holding a position of independence, between the wealthy and the people, prepared to curb the excesses of either, able lawyers have, to a large extent, allowed themselves to become adjuncts of great corporations and have neglected the obligation to use their powers for the protection of the people."

Now, more than a century later, Chevron, the third largest corporation in America, according to Forbes Magazine, has hauled out their lawyers in a case that would undermine the right of journalists to protect the people by telling them the truth. Joe Berlinger and his legal team have asked Judge Kaplan to suspend his order pending an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

As the Independent Documentary Association asserts, "This case offers a clear and compelling argument for more vigorous federal shield laws to protect journalists and their work, better federal laws to protect confidential sources, and stronger standards to prevent entities from piercing the journalists' privilege. We urge the higher courts to overturn this ruling to help ensure the safety and protection of journalists and their subjects, and to promote a free and vital press in our nation and around the world."

Bill Moyers is president of the Schumann Center for Media and Democracy. Michael Winship is president of the Writers Guild of America, East. Rebecca Wharton conducted original research for this article.

Read More

Chevron Kicks Out “Runners for Human Rights” in Houston

Apparently Chevron is so hysterical about its impending legal disaster in Ecuador it has taken to infringing on free speech here in the United States. Take a look at this post from Han over at ChevroninEcuador.com:

Chevron pulls strings, kicks 'Runners for Human Rights' out of pre-Chevron Houston Marathan expo

Our friends at Rainforest Action Network (RAN) have recently joined the effort to demand justice for the people of the Ecuadorian Amazon suffering from Chevron's massive contamination of their rainforest communities. In true RAN style, their first big public initiative is smart and engaging– a handful of RAN activists are "running for human rights" in the Chevron Houston Marathon, taking place this Sunday. As part of the Chevron-sponsored (and thoroughly branded) marathon, the organizers present a big public Expo, at which the RAN runners paid for a table to distribute info about why they're running.

But at 10am this morning, before the Expo even opened, the RAN team – registered and credentialed – was threatened with arrest and kicked out of the Expo building by police. According to the RAN team, Chevron Marathon Managing Director Steven Karpas told them that "higher ups at Chevron are freaking out." And apparently, the Chevron big-wigs' "freak-out" was enough to deny the RAN team of their right to free speech and get them ejected from a building owned and operated by the city of Houston.

This is another pathetic example of Chevron throwing its weight around and resorting to dirty tactics in attempt to hide the truth from the public. Let's hope that Chevron won't be able to stop the registered runners from taking part in the marathon. And regardless, we know they'll do a great job raising awareness in Houston, with plans to unveil banners along the race route, and host a screening of the explosive documentary CRUDE in Houston. Read the full RAN press release after the jump.

RAN's press release:


For Immediate Release January 15, 2010

Contact: Brianna Cayo Cotter, Rainforest Action Network, (415) 305-1943 (in Houston)

Houston Chevron Marathon Marred by Denial of Runners' Free Speech


Runners for human rights barred from Chevron Houston Marathon Expo, threatened with arrest

Houston, TX – A team that is running for human rights in Ecuador at this Sunday's Chevron Houston Marathon was just kicked out of the marathon's Expo by Chevron Marathon Managing Director Steven Karpas. The runners had paid for a table to distribute "I'm Running for Human Rights" stickers and information about Chevron's refusal to clean up over 18 billion tons of toxic oil sludge they are responsible for in the Ecuadorean rainforest.

At approximately 10 a.m. this morning, Managing Director Steven Karpas told the Rainforest Action Network team, "higher ups at Chevron are freaking out" and threatened to arrest the peaceful runners. Police then ejected the runners from the city-owned and operated building for exercising their right to free speech.

"We are outraged that Chevron would deny marathon participants the right to run for what they believe, in our case, human rights in Ecuador," said Rainforest Action Network runner Maria Ramos. "It is sad that the Chevron Houston Marathon - which raises awareness and money for many important causes - would deny the rights of participants to appease a corporate sponsor that is clearly ashamed of its human rights record."

When asked for a reason for their ejection, Steven Karpas told the runners they were being removed for "protest activities." The Rainforest Action Network team's objective at the Expo was not to protest, disrupt the Expo or dampen other runners experience at this important race. The runners merely wanted to sit at their table and invite other runners to run with them for human rights.

While in Houston, Rainforest Action Network advocates will run in the race, unveil "Energy Shouldn't Cost Lives" banners along the race route, distribute "I'm Running for Human Rights" stickers to other runners, and host a free screening of Crude – the critically acclaimed documentary about the crisis in Ecuador – for Chevron employees and the Houston community.

Chevron is currently facing a $27.3 billion pollution judgment against the company in an Ecuadorean court over Chevron's toxic legacy in the Amazon rainforest. Just yesterday, representatives of Amazonian indigenous groups in Ecuador went to U.S. federal court in New York today to enjoin Chevron from initiating a closed-door international arbitration against Ecuador's government designed to eliminate the company's potential $27 billion liability for contaminating a huge swath of rainforest and devastating the local population.

– Han

Born and raised in Baltimore, Han Shan is a human rights and environmental justice campaigner living in New York City. He is currently serving as an organizer with the Clean Up Ecuador campaign for Amazon Watch.

Read More