Critics Say Monsanto's Spying and Intimidation Operation Exposes Company's 'Toxic Corporate Culture' and Threatens Journalists' Rights

A non-profit food safety watchdog on Thursday revealed the lengths the agrochemical company Monsanto has gone to in order to keep the dangers of its products secret—monitoring journalists and attempting to discredit them, identifying a progressive musician and activist as a threat, and crafting a plan to counter the watchdog’s public information requests about the company.

Monsanto’s so-called “fusion center” targeted U.S. Right to Know (USRTK), which investigates safety and transparency issues within the U.S. food system. When USRTK filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests beginning in 2015 regarding Monsanto’s relationship’s with publicly-funded universities, the multinational corporation assembled a plan to counter the group’s findings, according to newly-released documents.

Journalists and critics of the company applauded USRTK’s release of the documents and said they only bolstered the case, long made by environmental and public health advocates, that Monsanto must be stopped from profiting off dangerous chemicals and covering up their harms.

Charlie Stross, a San Francisco-based writer and critic of the biotech company—which merged with former industry rival Bayer last year—said the revelations are just another reason the company should be abolished.

USRTK’s FOIA requests from public universities sent panic through Monsanto’s upper ranks, according to the documents released Thursday. The group has spent years investigating Monsanto’s secret collaborations with academics to ensure that studies and papers would be favorable to the company and its products—including the carcinogenic weedkiller Roundup.

The company said the information uncovered at universities had the “potential to be extremely damaging” and could “impact the entire industry.”

In more than 30 pages of internal documents detailing its plan to counter USRTK, Monsanto acknowledged that the “worst case scenario” resulting from the FOIA request would be an “egregious email [illustrating] what would be the smoking gun of the industry (e.g. email shows expert/company covering up unflattering research or showing GMOs are dangerous/harmful).”

“The company acts like it has an awful lot to hide,” said Gary Ruskin, co-director of USRTK, in a statement. “Whenever scientists, journalists, and others raise questions about their business, they attack. We are just the latest example. This has been going on for years.”

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT