I agree with Chris in Paris, who writes at AMERICAblog that Chevron is a company of "dirtbags involved in . . . disgraceful activity." The activity that Chris in Paris is referring to is Chevron's flouting of the U.N.s oil-for-food program in Iraq by illegally paying off Saddam Hussein's regime.
I'm puzzled, though, because as I noted two weeks ago, AMERICAblog is supported in part by Chevron's advertising. In light of Chevron's other disgraceful activities--notably, its support of the repressive monk-murdering regime in Burma--I wrote to John Aravosis and offered to more than make up whatever income he'd lose if he'd stop shilling for Chevron:
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2007 08:52:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Jim Trumm" <[email protected]>
Subject: Will you stop running Chevron ads?
To: [email protected]
Dear John,
For reasons I've outlined here
http://framed.typepad.com/framed/2007/11/going-through-m.html
I'm dismayed to see Americablog running ads by Chevron, in light of that company's support for the repressive regime in Burma. I will offer to reimburse you for up to one year for 125% of whatever income you lose by not running such spots.
Deal?
Jim
I never got any response from anyone at AMERICAblog. But in light of the recent post there about Chevron, I have to wonder what their rationalization is for taking Chevron's money and providing it with a platform from which to bamboozle the public.
Comments