publicity stunt in which Greenpeace, Humane Society United States (HSUS) and
the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) stretched belief beyond reality in
its attempt to link US clothing firm Talbots with Japan’s hunting of small
cetaceans.
In late May, the three organisations held a joint press conference in Boston
on the eve of Talbots annual shareholders meeting in an attempt to gain
high-profile coverage of Japan’s harvest of small cetaceans.
Present were Patricia Forkan, the Executive Vice President of the Humane
Society United States, Audrey Cardwell, Greenpeace’s oceans campaigner, Clare
Perry, a senior campaigner for the EIA and Allan Thornton, the President of the
EIA.
Ten other people turned up – half supporters of the organisations present.
The objective of the press conference was to get as many media as possible
convinced their particular news agency should run a story linking Talbots to the
harvest of small cetaceans. As it happens, the majority shareholder in Talbots
is JUSCO, which runs supermarkets throughout Japan. They stated that their
overall goal was to stop all commercial whaling.
Unfortunately, that was about all the evidence they found to prove the link
between Talbots and the kill. So it was lucky for those organisations that the
only media that turned up, even if it was 15 minutes into the presentation, was
a local television station.
The organisations believe that since JUSCO acquired majority ownership of the
Talbot’s clothing chain in 1988, more than a quarter of a million whales,
dolphins and porpoises have been killed by Japanese hunters, and that this
proved beyond doubt that Talbot’s supported the hunt.
Thankfully, only one news organisation – the local Fox News – even
bothered to report the conference. It would have been absolutely unjustified for
any news organisation to run articles based on the press conference.
What is disturbing is that this is normal practice for most of these
so-called environmental organisations that trade on the belief that once their
information is printed in the newspapers, or on the radio or television, it
takes on a life of its own and is regurgitated for months on end.
That these groups can attempt to damage businesses like this with confused
and unproven allegations should be illegal. And proof of such a crime should
come with a hefty penalty. These organisations are not above the law, yet are
able to damage the reputation of various businesses on a whim, and an
unsubstantiated whim at that.
Talbots issued a statement saying they were mystified by the allegation.
It is truly frightening for free speech and honest information that the EIA
was to take this issue around Canada, the UK and the US. This is wrong. These
organisations have no proof and are out to destroy the reputation of one of the
US’s most successful clothing outlets. That such press conferences and
distribution are allowed to occur, it is a complete and utter rejection of the
principles of fair play and good practice. 