Netflix on April 21 announced that it had gained 15.8 million subscribers in the first quarter of the year, almost double what market analysts had expected, largely due to the number of people staying home because of lockdowns or stay-at-home advisories to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
While that was good news for the world’s largest streaming service, it might not be for Formosa Plastics Corp (FPC), one of the four major subsidiaries of Formosa Plastics Group (FPG), which on April 10 posted a combined loss of NT$13.99 billion (US$469.43 million) for the quarter, its worst performance in five years. That is because on March 11, the second season of Netflix’s critically acclaimed investigative series about greed, crime and corporate corruption, Dirty Money, premiered worldwide, with six episodes that examine everything from Wells Fargo’s predatory business practices and fraud to Malaysia’s 1MDB scandal to Formosa Plastics’ damaging environmental practices at its massive plant in Point Comfort, Texas.
As a result of its actions at Point Comfort, FPG in October last year agreed to pay a US$50 million settlement to end a lawsuit over its discharge of plastic pellet waste and polyvinyl chloride powder into Lavaca Bay and other waterways near the Gulf of Mexico.
The settlement, which US District Judge Kenneth Hoyt approved on Dec. 3 and signed two days later, made headlines in Taiwan, the US and elsewhere when it was announced, not only because it was the largest financial settlement in a lawsuit brought by private individuals under the US Clean Water Act, but because FPG agreed to a zero-discharge agreement, something the plastics industry has long argued was impossible.
Hoyt and FPG made headlines the previous June when, in ruling in favor of the plaintiffs in that lawsuit, he called FPC a “serial offender” that had committed “enormous” infringements of the Clean Water Act and Texas state law since 2016.
The Dirty Money episode, Point Comfort, demonstrates that Hoyt’s comments were well deserved, for it is not just about malfeasance by FPG at the Texas plant.
Margaret Brown, who directed the episode, incorporated archive footage of protests against FPG in Taiwan, including those in November 1987 over pollution from its plant in what was then Kaohsiung County’s Renwu Township (仁武), as well as other protests in March 1993 and April 1999.
FPG’s poor track record is well known to Taiwanese. In 2009, the Environmental Protection Administration found that the soil and groundwater at the Renwu plant contained chemical compounds exceeding the agency’s standards, including 1,2-dichloroethane — which is believed to be a carcinogen — at 30,000 times higher than standards allowed.
However, Brown’s episode brings FPG’s story to homes around the world, showcasing the dichotomy between the company’s public relations efforts and the reality on the ground. It details the efforts of whistle-blowers and community activists such as Diane Wilson, a former commercial shrimper who waged a decades-long battle against FPG after she saw her industry destroyed by pollution from the Point Comfort plant. It also shows how easy it was for FPG to evade oversight from Texas regulators, as well as how the US Food and Drug Administration and the US Environmental Protection Agency are failing consumers and endangering their health, which are points that no doubt sound familiar to viewers in many nations outside Taiwan and the US.
The episode, which was produced before Hoyt finalized the settlement, leaves out an interesting part of the agreement: If Formosa issues any press release or statement about donations made or projects funded with the settlement, it must state that it has done so as a result of the lawsuit, not as part of corporate goodwill or largesse.
Point Comfort shows that in the end, there are some things that money just cannot buy.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s hypersonic missile carried a simple message to the West over Ukraine: Back off, and if you do not, Russia reserves the right to hit US and British military facilities. Russia fired a new intermediate-range hypersonic ballistic missile known as “Oreshnik,” or Hazel Tree, at Ukraine on Thursday in what Putin said was a direct response to strikes on Russia by Ukrainian forces with US and British missiles. In a special statement from the Kremlin just after 8pm in Moscow that day, the Russian president said the war was escalating toward a global conflict, although he avoided any nuclear
Would China attack Taiwan during the American lame duck period? For months, there have been worries that Beijing would seek to take advantage of an American president slowed by age and a potentially chaotic transition to make a move on Taiwan. In the wake of an American election that ended without drama, that far-fetched scenario will likely prove purely hypothetical. But there is a crisis brewing elsewhere in Asia — one with which US president-elect Donald Trump may have to deal during his first days in office. Tensions between the Philippines and China in the South China Sea have been at
US President-elect Donald Trump has been declaring his personnel picks for his incoming Cabinet. Many are staunchly opposed to China. South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, Trump’s nomination to be his next secretary of the US Department of Homeland Security, said that since 2000, China has had a long-term plan to destroy the US. US Representative Mike Waltz, nominated by Trump to be national security adviser, has stated that the US is engaged in a cold war with China, and has criticized Canada as being weak on Beijing. Even more vocal and unequivocal than these two Cabinet picks is Trump’s nomination for
An article written by Uber Eats Taiwan general manager Chai Lee (李佳穎) published in the Liberty Times (sister paper of the Taipei Times) on Tuesday said that Uber Eats promises to engage in negotiations to create a “win-win” situation. The article asserted that Uber Eats’ acquisition of Foodpanda would bring about better results for Taiwan. The National Delivery Industrial Union (NDIU), a trade union for food couriers in Taiwan, would like to express its doubts about and dissatisfaction with Lee’s article — if Uber Eats truly has a clear plan, why has this so-called plan not been presented at relevant
RSS