Unlike the simple and unmistakable yellow fruit on your kitchen table, the banana industry has a complex and troubled story. And as the global banana faces its greatest crisis ever, one might wonder- how did we get this banana, and how did the industry get to such a breaking point? Writer and journalist Dan Koeppel has been researching and tracking the world of bananas for several years and has information that most of the banana eating public has never heard. He joins me on today’s podcast as we discuss the history, the science, the politics and the future of the mighty banana.
My work on this site is not normally focused on breaking news, but this one just came out an hour ago and it involves the Plesner v. Louis Vuitton case we’ve been discussing over the past weeks. The judge in the Hague ruled today in favor of Plesner’s right to continue to show her painting, Darfurnica, and that her use of the image of a Louis Vuitton bag is both “functional and proportional.”
No word yet from either Nadia or the Vuitton side, but as a newfound voice for Darfur and freedom of expression, she will surely return to the podcast in the future. Click here for the initial report by Radio Netherlands regarding the court ruling.
I’ve never been to a court house in the Netherlands, in my 9 years in this country, somehow I never had cause to enter one. After weaving through some of the plethora of government buildings one can find in the Hague, I somehow managed to find the courthouse, though I was somewhat surprised there was no crowd out front. Considering the importance of the case, which features an art student being sued by a multinational corporation for depicting their product in her art, I figured there would be at least a dozen people holding signs outside in support. Silly me, too many hollywood films with people behind police barricades in front of ye olde city courthouse.
Court House in the Hague
I waltzed my way in and navigated my way through very modern hallways, past doors A through G, until I found my destination, court room H. A uniformed cop sat outside the door, the lonely figure in the hallway, fiddling with his phone in silence. I asked if I could go in and he gave a nonchalant nod. As I carefully opened the door I found myself in the audience, creeping quietly to find a seat, being noticed by all among the 15 to 20 people in attendance. I choose a spot by some people scribbling in notepads, “how old fashioned and quaint” I thought to myself in a condescending technologist tone. I looked forward and studied the figures in the front of the medium sized room, 2 judge looking people behind the big desk facing me, 2 lawyers dressed in black robes, one woman standing at the little microphone going over what seems to be a prewritten text, a young bearded man to her left going through pages of notes. Just next to them I see the long blonde hair and nervous look of who I immediately recognize as Nadia Plesner. She looks sad, which is not a surprise considering the magnitude of damages (5,000€ per day since January) she faces. As I look on the left side of the room, opposite the defence, I see the profile of what looks like a very shrewd legal mind, the Louis Vuitton lawyer. Close behind him sit 4 to 5 extremely well dressed, prim and proper individuals. Behind them two ladies are gabbing away into small microphones, I recognize what has to be simultaneous French translation, I presume, for the people back at the home office. The rest of the audience sits quietly, an assorted crew of concerned faces, occasionally shaking their head in disagreement or agreement with a statement that is made up front. Many are wearing little hand written pins with slogans about supporting art, supporting Nadia, and urging “Louis” to lighten up. And finally I notice there behind all of us, taking up the entire back wall of the court room is the subject of all this activity… the painting – Darfurnica.
I happen to be sitting right in front of the image of the boy holding the chihuahua and the luxurious handbag, which I now know is a Louis Vuitton bag. He’s decked out like Paris Hilton, while all around him are conflicting symbols of death and horror in Darfur, and Hollywood gossip-news-images of the rich and famous. In between are images of influential politicians with some role in what happens or does not happen in Sudan. Above it all, the sun, just like in Picasso’s Guernica, only instead of a lightbulb inside the sun, it is the logo of Petro-China, the oil company with the most investment in Sudan.
Just when I thought it wouldn’t get too exciting and that perhaps this would all be very routine until the judge finally makes a decision, the Vuitton lawyer gets his 20 minutes. Pacing around his little podium area, often with his arms folded, with a booming voice he presented a story filled with drama, conspiracies, and even some stern looks-jabs at the “media” in the room . Looking at the judge, even he seemed half fascinated and half bored with the extent to which events can be dramatized.
After long back and forth presentations and a few heated moments (more than 2 hours later), court is adjourned. It is hard to tell what the judge is thinking, but he’s giving both sides a critical look and has reprimanded them all at different times. As everyone files out into the hall, Nadia stays in the courtroom to do an interview with the big Dutch news program. Outside the Vuitton friends are huddled with the lawyer, they’re discussing where to get some drinks before some of them fly off to wherever it is they live. They’re confident but they keep it to themselves, glancing only occasionally at the young people adorned with pins, chatting only a few steps away.
As the corporate lawyer, now dressed in a very nice suit, walks towards the exit, he passes one of the girls with supportive pins. “May I have one as well, I think these are lovely…”, the somewhat surprised and nervous girl takes a step back and holds her bag of pins close.. “No, these are for those who support Nadia. Therefore not you. I think it wouldn’t be right.” Realizing the moment has passed, the lawyer shakes it off like he was only kidding, and walks out the door.
Just over a year ago Anna Lenzer’s exposé on Fiji Water rocked the carefully crafted eco-friendly image the bottled water company once had. From the political, to the environmental, to human rights issues, the piece featured in Mother Jones Magazine showed that Fiji Water was not the company it claimed to be.
One year later Fiji Water is once again making waves, this time by their own initiatives; announcing the closing of their operation in Fiji followed by a re-opening less then 2 days later.
Anna Lenzer returns to the podcast to talk about what is behind these activities, and what else has been going on over the course of the year since her article was published.
Scanning the landscape of the northeastern United States, from Connecticut down to Washington DC and all the states in between, there is no question that big corporate stores have firmly laid down roots. Of course large chain stores have always made up a part of American suburbia, but if you look back 20 years you’ll find even on main street in the smallest of towns, the corporate names have replaced to small name shops.
It is this change that perhaps led to the theme that keeps coming up in conversations with friends and random people during my travels, the behavior and manner of functioning of large corporations. Specifically the question: Is there a large company out there, that behaves itself, and can be trusted to do business while not harming communities, the environment, etc.? The answer is never clear, even if many believe its one way or the other, when you lay down all the facts and all the history, there is no one final word on this long standing question.
Since I’ve been back in the US, I’ve had a drink at a Starbucks, I’ve bought something at a Target, I’ve ordered from Amazon, and I’ve had dealings with Apple. I’m sure many reading these words are horrified because you want to believe I’m so disciplined and dedicated to human rights, that I’d never confess to spending the little money I earn with any of these big names with questionable records. So the secret is out, I’m not as good as you thought I was, but that doesn’t mean I don’t want to know more and figure out how, in the future, I might make better decisions based on well researched facts. In a land where you can hardly escape dealing with a large corporation to take care of basic and non basic needs, how does a socially conscious world citizen navigate? Beyond that, back to the original question: Can a large corporation ever really behave itself 100%?
I went looking around for some answers from the no-doubt large amount of people who have looked more closely into this issue and possible answers. One answer that is thought provoking, but still feels incomplete, comes from someone who talk me a lot about the history of the world:
Is it in the nature of corporations to oppose a healthy environment and decent working conditions for their employees? Unquestionably. The natural drive of corporations is to place profit before human needs. But that does not mean they cannot be induced–by the threat of losing some of their profit due to a boycott or strike–to change their policies, to pay attention to the environment, to do better by their employees. There is a long history that shows how powerful and selfish corporations can yield, at least a bit, to human needs if there is sufficient pressure from consumers and employees. –Howard Zinn, author of A People’s History of the United States
I didn’t take the time to see what year Zinn said this, but after reading this statement I’m still left wondering about the future. If strikes and boycotts are the greatest tools with which to influence corporations, what if we live in an era where neither has the impact it used to? What about the idea, albeit idealist, that a corporation could be run according to principles that value human rights and the public good above all, without having to be threatened?
I’ll end this post here, but this becomes the second in a series that have come to me during my US 2010 visit. The effectiveness of strikes, the future of protest, and the nature of corporations now and in the future. I will continue to explore and research this topic and would be curious to learn from anyone with more to add.
Returned to Amsterdam and noticed a new documentary film which is showing back in New York City this week, entitled: BANANAS!
Bananas! is the story of the Banana industry’s use of a chemical known as Nemagon, a highly toxic chemical compound used for spraying banana trees throughout the 60’s and 70’s. The pesticide has grave effects on the health of any mammal, as it caused massive levels of male sterility among banana workers, as well as high levels of cancer. Despite knowing the effects of the pesticide on humans, companies including Dole (one of the world’s largest banana growers) sprayed fields anyway without informing or making any effort to protect workers.
The film focuses not only on the banana industry but on the case of Juan “Accidentes” Dominguez, a lawyer representing 12 Nicaraguan banana workers suffering the effects of Nemagon, taking on Dole.
The emergence of the film naturally drew criticism and threats from Dole, who claim their own investigators determined most of the claims in the film to be fraudulent. They threatened legal action against the film, but according the film’s website, those suits have been withdrawn.
I had not heard about this film before today, and I have only begun to read specifically about Nemagon. But I very much intend to see the film when it comes to Amsterdam next month, as well as interview the director and perhaps some other parties involved in this issue. I’m sure you’re hoping I talk to Dole… I’ll see what I can do, large corporations don’t normally have time for we the independent reporters out there.
Scanning the landscape of the northeastern United States, from Connecticut down to Washington DC and all the states in between, there is no question that big corporate stores have firmly laid down roots. Of course large chain stores have always made up a part of American suburbia, but if you look back 20 years you’ll find even on main street in the smallest of towns, the corporate names have replaced to small name shops.