Summary of David Zaruk: Corrupt science and activist zealots | Tom Nelson Pod #213

00:00:00 - 00:50:00

In the "David Zaruk: Corrupt science and activist zealots" podcast episode 213 by Tom Nelson, David Zaruk discusses various topics related to the influence of activist groups, foundations, and law firms on industries, particularly the fossil fuel and agriculture sectors. He talks about the La Hoya Playbook , a strategy used by activist groups and law firms to target industries with lawsuits to force change or bankruptcy, inspired by the success against the tobacco industry. Zaruk also discusses how certain scientists and organizations have been excluded from policy debates and delegitimized, while activist scientists and foundations have gained significant influence. He mentions the role of foundations in funding studies and controlling the narrative against industries, raising concerns about transparency and potential conflicts of interest. The podcast also touches upon the influence of money on news organizations and the potential impact on journalistic objectivity, with examples of foundations funding stories on specific campaigns. Overall, Zaruk expresses concern about the corrupting influence of foundations and the trend towards adversarial regulation, where scientists retired from regulatory agencies have formed alliances with law firms to sue industries.

• 00:00:00 In this section of the podcast, David Zaruk discusses the La Hoya Playbook, a strategy used by activist groups and law firms to target industries, specifically the fossil fuel and agriculture sectors, with an onslaught of lawsuits to force change or bankruptcy. The strategy was inspired by the success of similar tactics against the tobacco industry. The conference was organized by the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Climate Accountability Institute in 2012, and the goal was to replicate the tobacco industry's demise by flooding these industries with lawsuits. The strategy gained traction with the targeting of Exxon for climate change and Monsanto for glyphosate, with significant financial backing from the tort industry and foundations. The narrative control was further amplified by paid journalists.
• 00:05:00 In this section of the podcast, David Zaruk discusses how certain scientists and organizations have been excluded from policy debates and delegitimized, while activist scientists and foundations have gained significant influence. The regulatory process has shifted towards adversarial regulation, where scientists retired from regulatory agencies have formed alliances with law firms to sue industries, producing studies funded by these law firms and testifying in court. Foundations, like The Tides Foundation, act as intermediaries, allowing industries to fund studies through them without direct ties being revealed. This model, which Zaruk calls "Foundation capitalism," allows activist groups and industries to make money by trying to upend the system, with media organizations amplifying their messages. Overall, Zaruk explains how the policy process has evolved in the last 10-15 years, favoring activist groups and foundations.
• 00:10:00 In this section of the podcast, Tom Nelson discusses the law firm Share Edling, which was formed in 2016 and has yet to win a case but represents governments and authorities in suing oil companies for the consequences of climate change. These governments are not primarily concerned with making billions but are worried about the costs of cleanup and risk management. Share Edling has around 35 cases against oil companies on behalf of governments and a few First Nation organizations, and they are funded by foundations. The foundations hide their funding in a discreet way, and one of the foundations, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, has been organizing meetings to strategize against the oil industry. A person named Nomi Rusk, who is critical of industry scientists and consultants, is on retainer for Share Edling and failed to disclose her funding when she wrote a paper on disclosure. The Rockefeller Brothers Fund also funds organizations to change Canadian energy policy and has a media war room to strategize against the oil industry. Rusk herself was paid by the law firms she represents. The foundations' involvement in funding and controlling the narrative against the oil industry is raising concerns about transparency and potential conflicts of interest.
• 00:15:00 In this section of the "David Zaruk: Corrupt science and activist zealots" podcast episode 213 by Tom Nelson, David discusses the influence of foundations on news organizations and the potential impact on journalistic objectivity. He mentions The Guardian, which receives around 200 million dollars annually from foundations, and how some of this money is used to fund stories on specific campaigns. An animal rights foundation is cited as an example, having funded hundreds of stories against livestock farming. The Associated Press and Bloomberg also receive significant funding from foundations. David questions whether this is a new trend or if it has always been the case, acknowledging the evolution of news media and the challenges of maintaining objectivity in an increasingly fragmented and algorithm-driven media landscape.
• 00:20:00 In this section of the "David Zaruk: Corrupt science and activist zealots" podcast episode, Tom Nelson discusses the Ramini Institute, which holds an anti-industry and anti-chemical stance towards occupational sciences. The Institute's anti-industry views were funded by the tort law industry in the United States. Nelson explains how companies involved in processing and managing thousands of plaintiffs, whom he refers to as "misery merchants," buy and sell cases, with some law firms receiving higher prices for "higher value" cases. Doctors are also paid funds in hospitals to refer cases to law firms, which is unethical and potentially illegal. Nelson mentions the case of White and Luxenburg, a company involved in glyphosate, and discusses how companies may settle lawsuits to avoid negative publicity and financial losses. The podcast also touches upon the influence of money on what we've been told about the health effects of foods like Cheerios and Quaker Oats. The Environmental Working Group, which released a study on trace residues of chloric quat in these products, is funded by an anonymous donor through a Donor Advised Fund. After the study's release over a holiday weekend, a class action suit against Quaker Oats was filed, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest.
• 00:25:00 In this section of the podcast, David Zaruk discusses the cozy relationship between interest groups, foundations, and law firms, using the Environmental Working Group as an example. He explains that two days after a report was published against the company, lawsuits were filed, revealing a pattern of financial connections. Zaruk then delves into the history of philanthropy, noting how industrialists in the 1920s built foundations to give back to society. He highlights the recent tech-driven wealth generation moments, such as the crypto boom and the current AI boom, which have led to numerous foundations being established by young billionaires. Zaruk also mentions how these foundations, often managed by organizations, are funding activist campaigns, with some foundations even participating directly. He expresses concern that this trend is corrupting the young and turning foundations into cults.
• 00:30:00 In this section of the podcast, Tom Nelson discusses the group Effective Ventures, which is associated with the effective altruism movement encouraging young people to give away their money for the greater good. The organization reportedly has a problem with sexual abuse and has lost billions of dollars. One of its main board members, Sam Bankman-Freed, is accused of ordering checks to be written to various campaign organizations, some of which are linked to effective Ventures. The group also funds films, such as "Into the Weeds" about Tor law firms, which are used as campaign tools rather than for commercial success. The funding sources of these films are kept anonymous, making it difficult to trace where the money comes from. This raises concerns about the influence of money on academia, universities, and the media.
• 00:35:00 In this section of the podcast, David Zaruk discusses the issue of political contributions and the role of donor-advised funds in influencing scientific research. He expresses concern over the large amounts of money being spent on causes, and questions whether there is a way to stop this trend. Zaruk also touches on the new media landscape and the polarization of society into different tribes, making it difficult for truth to be disseminated without significant resources. He uses the example of pesticides, specifically glyphosate and copper sulfate, to illustrate how certain chemicals are targeted for scrutiny while others, despite being more toxic, are overlooked due to lobbying influences.
• 00:40:00 In this section of the podcast, David Zaruk discusses the conversation around geoengineering and cloud seeding, drawing parallels to the denial and fear-mongering surrounding climate change. He criticizes the climate anxiety and activist campaigns that focus on stopping certain practices rather than finding solutions. Zaruk also reflects on the history of similar predictions of population and resource sustainability issues and the role of innovative ideas and industries in solving problems. He mentions Greta Thunberg's rise and fall in the public eye, suggesting that the climate narrative might be crumbling.
• 00:45:00 In this section of the "David Zaruk: Corrupt science and activist zealots" podcast episode 213 on Tom Nelson's channel, Zaruk discusses the importance of putting things into perspective and focusing on the bigger issues rather than minor problems. He uses the example of how people tend to focus on small issues and create an "Armageddon" mentality, but after the COVID-19 pandemic, people realized that there are more significant problems, such as ongoing wars. Zaruk shares his experience from Brussels, where the European commission was pushing for their green deal despite major issues, and how farmers put an end to their strategies by bringing their tractors into cities. He also mentions the farmers' struggles with various risk factors and governments cutting their access to technologies, leaving them at a disadvantage. Additionally, Zaruk talks about the concept of ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) and how big food manufacturers and retailers pressure farmers to grow food according to their ESG requirements, which may not be suitable for certain crops.
• 00:50:00 In this section of the podcast, Tom Nelson discusses the European Union's role in imposing environmental, social, and health standards on other countries through unaccountable means. The EU has passed a directive to harmonize reporting, including ESG reporting, as law. American companies doing business in Europe are likely to adopt the same accounting practices and standards, making it essential for US companies to comply with these regulations. Europe has been imposing such standards to legitimize itself and gain control over industries they cannot influence in the US or other countries. The speakers also touch upon the issue of scientists and NGOs being funded by foundations and interest groups, leading to the promotion of biased and "independent" science. They discuss how this has impacted the agricultural industry in Europe and the US, with examples from Canada and Mexico. David Zaruk, the guest on the podcast, is an investigative journalist who covers media manipulation, activist science, and the role of foundations. Listeners can find his work through the links provided in the podcast description, under his two identities, The Fire Break and The Risk Monger.