More Monsanto fake news is hiding in plain sight. Reuters recently printed an article attacking the International Agency for Cancer Research. In 2015, the IARC ruled that glyphosate – in Roundup and other Monsanto poisons – is a “probable carcinogen.” The Reuters writer has been revealed to be a Monsanto shill funded by the company.
Ethan Huff reported August 28, 2017 that Reuters is now in bed with Monsanto. Mr. Huff says Reuters is “committing journalistic fraud to cover up evidence of harm from toxic agricultural poisons.”
Related: Monsanto Lawsuit
Monsanto Shill: Congressman Trey Gowdy
Meanwhile, House Republicans are using the journalistic fraud to defend Monsanto. The biotech bully from St. Louis is having a hard time maintaining any credibility in the public eye after the IARC, as well as several studies, have revealed glyphosate causes cancer in humans.
In an effort to turn the facts around, Monsanto has apparently co-opted the services of a Reuters journalist who recently published an article claiming Monsanto’s Roundup is safe. House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy is now using the planted, slanted Reuters article as some sort of scientific fact. It would all be laughable, except that glypohosate causes cancer, and the Reuters piece is simply regurgitated Monsanto PR.
Reports say Gowdy is demanding answers about “possibly withheld information” which he says “could change” the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s (IARC) landmark designation of glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen. Gowdy wrote a letter pointing to a June 14, 2017 Reuters article by Kate Kelland. Mr. Gowdy claims that Ms. Kelland shows glyphosate is not all that bad and should not be labeled carcinogenic.
Closer inspection shows Ms. Kelland’s article deeply flawed, loaded with unsubstantiated Monsanto talking points and PR spin. Mr. Gowdy may have noticed if he wasn’t so quick to support Monsanto company profits. The wayward congressman has decided to promote Ms. Kelland’s article as if it were gospel evidence that Monsanto has somehow been treated unfairly. (Poor Monsanto!)
Stacy Malkan points out in a piece for AlterNet that Ms. Kelland has been writing all sorts of pro-Monsanto articles for quite a while. And Reuters has been publishing her Monsanto PR without question. This latest piece follows the same tired narrative that Monsanto has been pushing for its ongoing war on science, on independent researchers (like Dr. Gilles-Eric Seralini), on truth.
Reuters’ Kate Kelland’s ties to Industry PR Group Science Media Centre
Mr. Malkan’s rebuttal shows Ms. Kelland shrouding the truth about the IARC report. The IARC gathered and evaluated many years’ worth of published and peer-reviewed research on glyphosate before reaching its conclusion. Rebutting Ms. Kelland’s straw-man claims, the glyphosate research reached deeply into past studies. It wasn’t simply limited to Professor Gilles-Eric Seralini’s research paper, which was pulled from publication by an editor later found to be put in place by Monsanto, then re-published after scientists worldwide protested Monsanto’s blatant attack on science and truth.
Ms. Kelland’s so-called evidence backing glyphosate is also flawed on other grounds. As Mr. Malkan points out, nearly all of her Monsanto defense pieces are simply pro-industry propaganda. She cites papers by researchers who were obviously working in tandem with Monsanto, researchers further impugned by their abject failure to disclose their industry and financial connections. Much of what Ms. Kelland has presented is also cherry-picked and deliberately taken out of context.
Monsanto Writer with Obvious Ties to Industry
Ms. Kelland has undisclosed ties to the industry as well, ties that Mr. Malkan uncovered as centering around the Science Media Centre, a “nonprofit” public relations firm that connects industry scientists with reporters. The Science Media Centre is also funded by industry groups like Monsanto with an agenda to push.
Science Media Centre Subterfuge
The Science Media Centre was launched for the very purpose of rebutting news stories drawing attention to environmental and human health risks of poison chemical cocktails like Monsanto’s Roundup. By downplaying or attacking these stories, the Science Media Centre functions as the sneaky PR arm of Monsanto and other corporations trying to clean up their tarnished images.
Mr. Malkan writes: “Kelland’s bias in favor of SMC is evident; she appears in the PR agency’s promotional video and promotional report, regularly attends SMC briefings, speaks at SMC workshops and attended meetings in India to discuss setting up an SMC office there.”
SMC, we know what you are and who pays you to keep publishing your industry-promoting PR. And now the world knows. Time to figure out some sneakier way to try pulling the wool over the public’s eyes.
More Monsanto Fake News
Mr. Gowdy, the world is watching you, too, and figuring out where your loyalties lie. Black-box voting be damned, the people will vote you out anyway, you little corporate shill.
- Reuters now in Bed with Monsanto: Journalistic Fraud
- Monsanto Lawsuit
- Roundup Cancer Lawsuit
- Glyphosate Cancer Link
- Monsanto EPA Collusion?
- More Monsanto Fake News