The Corporation

CorporationI think ‘The Corporation‘ (2003) is a shock movie for most people, especially young people who are new entrants to the business world. It is a documentary about the corporation- a ubitiquous, though artificial, entity- which has become an economic, social, and political force around the world. The movie is no balanced analysis of the corporation, rather it is an examination of a corporation’s negative behavior- what the film refers to as “a dangerously destructive psychopath without conscience”.

 The basic argument of the movie is that the corporation is a legal person with constitutional rights but no responsibilities. It compares corporations to a psychopath on various defining criteria of a clinical psychopath. But where it does a really great job is providing examples of corporate mis-actions. I think this is where a new recruit to the business world will learn most- Seeing actual, real world, concrete examples of how companies that we all love and have grown up with have influenced our lives in negative ways!

I recommend the movie to all those who who are looking for a thought-provoking movie to watch (with a disclaimer that it is a one-sided view of the corporate world).   


179 responses to “The Corporation

  1. Tineisha Whitehead

    The Corporation was very interesting. It was amazing how the number of wrong doings out weighted what was right. In fact, some of the externalities such as the foreign sweat shop problem was just hideous. It clearly states that big corporations are in business strictly for the money instead of caring about society like a “legal person” would.

  2. Amanda Fochek

    I think this movie was sort of an eye opener. The story about how Fox News did not want to air the documentary made and then the fight that the two reporters had against them was interesting to hear about. I’ve heard that stuff like that happens within big corporations, but I have never actually heard a detailed story. I have never had contact with dishonesty to that degree so it’s hard to imagine that there are people out there in today’s business world that would go to great lengths to keep something a secret. The ending to that story was especially alarming since the courts disagreed with the woman reporter. Watching a movie like this makes me think twice about the honesty of our country and even world as a whole.

  3. Nicole Furman

    This was a very informative documentary. I thought the analogy of comparing a corporation to a psychopath was very interesting. All of the evidence used to “diagnose” the corporation was very interesting and thought-provoking. I agree that corporations are out of control. They exploit people and the environment in a number of ways, and I agree that they only consider “social responsibility” because it will help them to earn more profits. Two parts that I really found to be interesting were about the Fox News reporters and about IBM supporting the Nazi concentration camps. Both stories really surprised me. I think it is a very good exercise to have students who are getting ready to enter the business world watch such a documentary. It gives us something to think about because in the end, change rests with future business professionals. My only complaint about this movie was the length. It was very hard to pay attention after the first half because the movie seemed to repeat itself over and over. I think a more to-the-point film with less tangents would have been more effective.

  4. I really enjoyed the movie. I have never thought about the corporation in this way before. I think that the most shocking story was the one involving IBM and the Nazi’s. It is really disturbing to think that an American based company was supporting something so cruel. I think this was a very interesting assignment. It will help us to be well informed before we enter the really world. I think when you watch the movie you need to remember it has a biased view towards the corporation.

  5. “The Corporation” is an interesting film. Many of the issues discussed in the film, are old news….however, it is imporant for future professionals to keep this issues in mind as they enter the business community. While the movie made some great arguments, it was far too long and did not stay focussed on the core message.

    In my opinion the message is that corporations do not have sufficient controls in place. Corporations are large, powerful and very influencial. Many corporations simply take, and do not give anything back. Unfortunately, before this can change, we need a change/modification to the law and an attitude shift. For example, our courses teach us that the only concern a corporation should have is creating value for the shareholders. Today, corporations are in fact creating more value, but the back-end costs are greater than the value produced. A change must occur, or as the movie said….the ground will approaches us very quickly as we fall to the Earth.

  6. “The Corporation” was quite an interesting film. I have heard about companies such as Nike utlizing sweatshops for cheaper labor purposes but I did not know the extent of the conditions or the amount of wages paid. I found this quite appalling. Also, when some companies feel that the wage levels are becoming too high, they bail out and ditch the people depending on those wages.

    I found the segment on chemical companies and theyre knowledge of a possibly dangerous product quite interesting as well. The Rgbh incident was to me, totally nuts. As the movie said, if someone shoots another person there are massive reprecussions but if a company sells a product that costs lives the story could be suppressed and no actions taken. Overall, I found the film very interesting and am thankful I had the opportunity to see it.

  7. The Corporation was an eye opener for me also. It made me realize the magnitude of the effects corporate actions have on the environment and in turn global society. I knew things like dumping and harmful chemicals were an issue but did not fully understand the extent of their consequences. Also, the confessions of the commodities trader commenting on their willingness for eastern nations and Saddam to continue their actions so he and other traders can profit from the price of oil was disturbing since their trades can help inflate commodity prices.

    In my opinion the corporation is not entirely at fault for these issues. Societies demand for more efficiency, speed, and affordability in the goods and services we consume on a daily basis create opportunities for these corporations to capitalize on. These demands have lead to things such as large factories and automation that produce large amounts of harmful waste contributing to the issue of dumping. I would agree with one of the interviewee’s opinion that the environment and also society would benefit from the privatization of the Earth itself creating an interest in maintaining its well being. Of course there is always the question of “what are the intentions of the acquiring entity?” I believe that creating costs associated with pollution by allowing permits to be traded will create incentives for corporation to create solutions or alternatives. Hopefully in time this will reduce the externality referred to as “taxation without representation” by one interviewed executive we are leaving to our future generations.

  8. The Corporation was a pretty shocking movie. Although it was kind of long, it was filled with great info and compelling stories. It really allowed me to see that some, not all, corporations will go to great extremes to make or increase their profits. The Fox News and IBM/Nazi stories were very interesting to hear about. It uncovers these stories to the public and for many of us, it shines a light on the real corporate world. All in all it was very interesting and I enjoyed watching it.

  9. abusinessprofessor

    When one looks at people’ review of ‘The Corporation’ on the world wide web, the reviews are generally positive. Though some may disagree with certain parts of the movie, most people seem to agree that the modern corporation has a ‘not-so-good’ side to it. Nick Davis of Chicago provides a good review of the movie on his blog at He calls the movie “energetic” and “practical”, but believes it comes from the “leftist cinema”. (I didn’t know there was a rightist cinema and a leftist cinema! Whatever happened to just cinema?). However, Lew Rockwell, former chief of staff of Presidential candidate Ron Paul and a founder member of the Mises Institute, provides a good defence for the “modern corporation”. His article, written for what he refers to as those who “view the modern corporation with suspicion”, is available on his blog at Interesting read!

  10. I think this film shows a great example of how corporations have gone astray of what the corporation was originally intended to be. Corporations have set profits and bottom lines over the shareholders and the stakeholders, or the global community in which they operate in. Instead of being loyal, trustworthy, and fulfilling the obligations to the global community, shareholders, stakeholders, and workers, it seems many corporations have chosen to satisfy internally. I don’t know where to place blame. I don’t think corporations are solely to blame for “big business.” I think the greed of our society plays a major part as well. This was an interesting movie that exposed things I think most of us turn a blind eye too, but know are going on and will continue to go on unless the future generations of business leaders commit themselves to change.

  11. Daniel Miller

    This film does a good job of illustrating the poor aspects of corporations. Many corporations need to take extra steps to be “better neighbors.” It is important to remember that a corporation’s main objective is to make money. So in order to improve a corporations poorer qualities it is the job of the consumers to give corporations an incentive to improve. I really appreciated the way that the movie looked at such a wade range of problems that corporations have. It really gets the message out that their are a lot of problems that need to tbe fixed.

  12. That film was interesting but can any one say PROPAGANDA. I think that the movie did point out the negative side of corporations effectivly but at the same time it forgot to include the good things that corporations do for society. First of all think about investors, they would not invest in corporations if they did not want to make money. Second, corporations help create an efficient market. Those that can not keep up go bankrupt and those that can keep up have to look for ways to stay profitable. Third, corporations have come up with some of the most innovative products that have benefited society tremendously. I must be naive but I am one of those people that believe there are just a “few bad apples.” Do not get me wrong I agree that SOME corporation have gone too far but at the same time corporations have benefited society greatly.

  13. Nicole Dwornicki

    I thought that this movie was long, but very interesting. I think that big corporations are out of control. I feel this movie focuses on the issues of ethics and accountability. It appears that there are many companies that do not have any ethics. We all know in the back of our minds that discount stores like Wal-Mart can afford to keep prices so low by running sweatshops, but we chose to ignore it because it saves us money. On-the-other-hand, Nike charges higher prices for their shoes; therefore, their employees continue to receive nothing while they help increase profit for the company and it’s shareholders. In cases of sweatshops, when do we as consumers become accountable?

    In the case of IBM, they did not personally kill millions of people during World War II; yet they were responsibly for providing the Nazis with punch card machines that were used to help keep tracks of the prisoners. I truly doubt that IBM did not know what their machines were used for, and at what point should IBM be held accountable for their part in the Holocaust? I know that there are good and bad aspects of corporations, yet I feel that there needs to be stronger regulations, more emphasis on ethics, higher fines for companies that ignore laws and regulations, and corporations need to be held accountable for their actions.

  14. Molly Mickeliunas

    This was a very interesting film. Some of the stories were kind of appalling. Businesses do wrong to get themselves ahead which questions ethics. Deciding to manipulate consumers to earn a buck and move product doesn’t seem like the right way to do business. On the other hand if they don’t move product off the shelves then they don’t make money. It seems that in order to survive you have to be corrupt.

  15. Jillian Bierce

    I thought that “The Corporation” was a very interesting movie. It kept my attention throughout the movie. I could not believe some of the things experts would state, whether they were true or not, so consumers would buy their products. The dairy farmers using Posilac was a prime example of that. I wish they would have talked about more positive things that corporations engage in. There is always a positive and a negative side to everything and it would be nice to hear the other side.

  16. I thought “The Corporation” was a very well produced documentary. It did a good job of pointing out all the ways that large corporations use their size to sort of bully around anyone that gets in there way, notice the Fox News story. I must say though, it was painfully obvious this documentary was created to point out all the things that large corporations do to hurt the economy, but offers very little to how corporations could go about helping make the economy a better place. I really wasn’t surprised by what I saw because you hear about the dumping of excess waste and use of sweat shops in third world companies all the time.
    Corporations are created to make profits. When you go to your stock broker you don’t want him to invest your money into the corporation that does the best job at saving the earth, or is going green, you want your money to go where to it will grow the fastest or largest. Why else would you put your money into the stock market?

  17. I felt this movie did not show corporations in a very good light. It portrayed them as a heartless and deceiving entity. It was horrible to see how corporations were using sweatshops in under privileged countries. But you can’t always blame the corporations because are Americans really willing to pay higher prices for their goods? I found it very disturbing the characteristics of a psychopath are the same as some corporations. I think that profits really fuel some bad mindsets for corporations. I was shocked to see how many corporations were found guilty for breaking laws and had to pay huge fines. The movie also listed corporations who were found trading with enemies of the United States. It is just really odd to see that they don’t have respect for laws and think they can do whatever they want, even if it is wrong. But I don’t necessarily feel all the people in corporations are bad people. Like that analogy the movie listed about the slave owners. They could have been really upstanding citizens and nice to their slaves, but what they are doing, having slaves, is wrong. The man from Shell seemed like a good man who knew what he was doing and was trying to do things to change it. I wasn’t that impressed with Phil Knight though; he hasn’t even been to his own factories. But I did learn a lot about different companies from this movie, some I can’t think of the same way anymore.

  18. This movie was very interesting. Hopefully, those information were given in this film were true. They should talk about both sides of Corporations because Corporations had big influence in economy. People who contributed in this film were so extreme like the Communist.

  19. This movie was very interesting and don’t think i will ever think the same way. It is however very one sided but, i feel that there are many corporations out there that are really causing serious problems for the future of the human race. I couldn’t believe how coke and Ibm indirectly supported the Nazi Party. I think that corporations have changed alot from the past and it seems like all of there business plans are: Make money at all cost. Its a fine line that corporations have to follow. If a corporation is 100% ethical and “green” then it has a small chance that it can compete with others in the industry that are not following the same rules. Small business and corporations are what drive this economy. Without them we would have nothing. Corporations as bad as they may be still are the #1 driving force when it comes to innovation and new inventions. So money makes this world go round and without corporations the economy would be struggling. And it would effect everything!!!

  20. Lindsay Cordle

    This movie was an eye-opener and portrayed the corporation in a way I’ve never been exposed to before. Although it focused on the corporation as a negative entity, I am not convinced that corporations are ‘psychopaths.’ Corporations provide us, as citizens, with the majority of the products and services we use a daily basis for survival. They also serve as places of employment for many of us so we can earn an income to purchase the products and services we depend on for our well-being. In addition, I don’t agree with the statement that all living systems are in decline. I hold a more optimistic view based on the past and that humans have always made it through even the worst of situations.

    I do agree that there are some unfortunate outcomes that have resulted in the corporate world, such as the Fox News and Kathy Lee cases presented in the movie. However, in our society, where money is regarded as being so highly important and desirable, problems will continue to arise. Although it is true that companies do try to earn as much revenue as possible in a given quarter, they must be given credit for this because they would not remain in business if they did not. One should not forget the positive aspects of the corporate world. Michael Moore stated it well when he said that we must all take responsibility for our individual actions. Overall, the film was constructed very well, but left out an entire opposing view.

  21. I think that corporations are too powerful to be considered individual entities. Fortunately, congress and the SEC are starting to scrutinize their deals more closely. Also, the green movement is using their “bottom line” motivations to work for good (or at least fake it). Some things seem to be moving backwards, however. Now, media companies are given more liberties to acquire multiple types of media to display their points of view. The problem is that society just takes it. We are perfectly content sitting on our couches and doing nothing.

    I don’t agree with the position that corporations should be given credit for some of the positive things they accomplish for the founders, the customers, and society as a whole. That’s just like saying, “I don’t always like what my parents tell me, but I have to listen to them because I am not legally an adult. And I won’t fight them because they pay for my food and shelter and neat gadgets.” We are not their children. I admit, if I wanted to give my company a boost, an IPO would be an awesome tool. But what will the next CEO do with it after I’m gone? There is no cure for human greed, but I think we can do more as a society to reform the legal definitions of a corporation or just create a brad new business entity that can do the same good without quite as many negative consequenses.

  22. It’s a shame how unethical corporations are. How all they think about is money even if it’s at the expense of some peoples’ lives. What can i say, money talks. What’s even more crazy is that though most of us criticize corporations, if we were all put in a situation where we could make millions potentionly billions, most likely alot of us would do the same things that corporations are doing in the movie, not excluding myself. Think about that.

  23. The Corporation was a revelation for me. I had an idea about the situation, but was unaware of the magnitude and the severity of the situation. When the movie started, I immediately thought about George Orwell’s book, 1984, which was the first piece of literature I had read that alluded to the notion that a giant corporation or giant corporate person could one day take over the world. The book, 1984, was disturbing, and what made it disturbing was that there was a hint of reality to it–you knew in the back of your mind that it could come true. Here, with The Corporation, the same is true for me. Granted not all corporations are abusing their power and practicing unethical behavior, but the bottom line is that some major corporations are doing some questionable stuff and taking advantage of their influence and sway with society, which could very well lead our society in a direction we dont want to go. Big Brother could be right around the corner and we not know it.
    It is obvious that the big corporations have unlimited power and too much political influence. Even though the movie could be viewed as a negative slant on the corporate world, the producers did a good job of presenting an objective view of the current situation. You could say it was one-sided, and make a pretty good argument for that becuase we don’t really know which corporations are doing good things and which are doing bad things. We don’t know the actual statistics or percentages for this, so we cant just say that all corporations are bad (which the movie kinda of does). The bottom line is that there are some major corporations out there that are obviously doing more harm than good. I fully agree with the idea that the corporation is an artificial giant person and also a psychopath bent on doing what it pleases when it pleases. They have no accountability because they are, in a sense, making their own laws with their political ties.

  24. Sarahe Eltiste

    The Corporation provided me with insight into the corporate world that I never gave much thought to. It is unreal how much money can inspire people to do immoral and unethical things. The corporate world should yearn for honest employees, with an intense amount of integrity. But by watching the film, it seemed the opposite. Do corporations of today look for employees who will go along with the way their “morals” dictate? The whistle-blower segment was most interesting to me. To hear that a news station can fabricate stories and get away with it, then fire employees who will not follow the unethical tactics of their corporation blew my mind. Not to mention, learning that IBM was linked to Hitler was unreal to me. How many IBM products to I own and/or use? This will definitely cause me to rethink buying or using any IBM products.

  25. Umutai Mamarasulova

    I found “the Corporation” interesting, informative, and shocking at the same time. The most shocking part of the movie was to learn about IBM and the Nazi involvement. However, as I was watching the foreign sweat shop issue I start realizing that the movie was a bit exaggerated. From taking finance courses, we know that the $ value is different all over the world. The wages paid could be standard for that area and could be of greater value for those foreign workers. The movie also left out the fact that all those workers would otherwise be jobless. I don’t support the corporations who exploit the foreign workers; I just think the movie strongly emphasized only negative sides of the corporations.

    Overall, I enjoyed the movie for great real examples, case studies and stories. It was fascinating to learn how a town in South America had to fight for its water, or how Fox News reporters had to fight to tell public the truth. Even though the movie was 2 ½ long, it was worth watching it.

  26. The Corporation was an eye-opener for me. In my mind, I knew that some corporations were conniving and calculating when it came to conducting business. I was not aware of the extent of their actions nor was I aware that almost every corporation I purchase goods/services from on a daily basis has been linked to either jeopardizing our health or the environment. It scares me that our government has taken little or no action on questionable practices on some of the U.S.’s top corporations. For example, the USDA approving a hormone injection for dairy cows when insufficient research has been conducted on the effects of this product. Especially when other countries, such as Canada, have rejected it because of its risk of cancer and birth defects. We grow up being told we need to trust the government, then we become more educated and come to realize that they’re in cahoots with big business. Contrary to most of the film, it showed a situation where a CEO of a large corporation was actually concerned about all the same things that his consumers were worried about. This man showed compassion and sympathy towards the environment as well as the wellbeing of others’ health and safety. This provided me with at least a little comfort that there are some big business owners that don’t make business decisions solely based on profits, and actually use their moral and ethical judgment.

  27. “The corporation” is a very informative and eye opening documentary. In the movie everybody talked about the making money is the bottom line for every corporation. It is true everybody here do something for some purpose. But the way corporations are doing is unbelievable. How people playing with nature to make them rich. All the evidences used in the movie were very interesting. The fox news part was very interesting. There are other issues also discussed in the movie to. One of them is how corporation going globally and using their people to produce their items for cheap prices. One part of movie discussed about oil prices where commodities traders wants eastern nation to continue burning their oil well so oil price go up and they can make more money out of it. After viewing this film, one can easily conclude that these large corporations have too much power, and for their own profit they can do anything.

  28. The Corporation was an eye-opener for me as well. There were a lot of things that made it apparent in was written by an outsider looking in though. His perspective was very anti-United States. The thing that suprised me the most was the segment regarding the steriods in U.S. milk. The said that other countries refused to use the drug becuase of its side effects. Regardless of these effects the U.S. still uses those drugs in our milk today. It was said to be a cause for cancer.

  29. I have to agree with Van Tran in that the contributors in the film were all very one-sided, attempting to portray all big business in a negative light, which doesn’t surprise me seeing that Michael Moore is one of the contributors. The basic message of the movie is understandable, that we all need to pay more attention to the outcomes of our actions and attempt to reduce our ‘footprints’ upon the Earth. But realistically, when the Industrial Revolution was occurring, no one knew or even predicted that we would find ourselves in this current situation.

    I did find it disturbing that the Patent Office will approve patents for any living being, excluding only human beings. I don’t believe that any one person or corporation should own the ‘blueprint’ to life, as if these organisms were created and developed exclusively from the ingenuity of the corporation. However, technology has advanced so quickly and rapidly that the government doesn’t understand or have the ability to know all the answers to these new deveopments.

    As far the CEOs that were interviewed in this film, they weren’t abiding by their corporate duties to obey laws and corporate trust themselves. So I can’t take those peoples’ viewpoints as a standard for how all corporate officers act. Honestly, this documentary made me wonder why they didn’t have Al Gore giving his two cents worth, too.

  30. I’m Shaina’s father and watched the film as well. In my long career of 30 plus years, I have worked for a variety of large and small corporations. In the early seventies when I started in the corporate world, the people in charge did not pay a lot of attention as to how our business decisions impacted the environment. It wasn’t until the late 1970’s with the establishment of the EPA,OSHA, other organizations and enacted laws that it came to be a part of the decisions I and others made. When we saw how our actions influenced our families, friends and fellow employees we became more aware of the impact we made on the environment. Looking at it from a common sense view point we were able to change a lot of the manufacturing proceess to improve the environment and we were able to do so without impacting the profits of the company. None of the people I have worked with ever intentionaly made decisions that hurt the air and water.

  31. Richard Caniglia

    As I look at other peoples blogs the words “Eye Opening” is mentioned over and over. Is any of this information that much of a suprise. Anyone who watches the news or picks up a newspaper is informed of these situations all the time. The best analogy I can come up with is to compare corporations to a child limit testing. These corporations are seeing how far they can go before they are reprimanded for what they do. It’s human nature to do this and since corporations don’t do the actions the people do these unfortunate events will occur. “Without struggle there would be no progress” – in other words without Enron there would be no Sarbanes Oxley. All of the corrupt things corporation have done have paved the way for the rules and regulations that are in place today. Eventually someone was going to exploit the system it is an absolute certainty of life.

    The facts mentioned in the film I did find interesting. The most shocking of the stories was about Monsanto and how they manipulated Fox to cover up a story that would have negaitve effects to them. Another story that was just appauling was the NYC broker who almost seemed happy about 9-11 because the gold stock went up that his clients had. That was probably the upsetting statement in the whole film and how he wanted Sadam to continue burning oil wells so oil price would continue to rise.

    I like Michael Moore and the films/documentaries that he does. I however work for a large corporation, that I do believe does a lot to reduce the ‘footprints’ on the enviornment. This film is mostly one sided, but I think that side needs to be heard so I’m all for it. I know corporations are necessary to the world and they aren’t going to go away. The rules and regulations that are in place today are limiting the corrupt actions. At the same time I know corporations are cooking up new schemes or running one right now that has not been identified. No one can stop all the wrong corportations do – the best thing to do is hold them accountable and make an example out of them so we don’t see the same problems happen again.

  32. The Corporation is very interesting. I really have never heard of any of this before. It is kind of freighting to know how much power Corporations actually have.

    One of the things mentioned in the film was the unsafe milk in Florida. I know that Fox News wants to earn profits, but to what point are they willing to go to achieve this. If something is unsafe and could kill humans why would they risk not telling the public what really was in the milk and how this could harm them.

    I also was interested in the IBM story on how they leased a computer system to the Nazi’s in Germany to keep track of the people in the concentration camps. That just makes me sick that IBM in Germany knew what was going on and did not to stop it. IBM just wanted to make a profit and they were willing to do so by helping a group kill others.

    Government needs to get more involved and help the consumers and citizens. I liked this film it definitely opened by eyes to the bad side of corporations. This is something that I think everyone should watch to know that not always do the consumers know that the products they are using or consuming are safe and that corporations really care about profits more than anything.

  33. I really enjoyed The Corporation. I do think that this was an extremely slanted movie but it brought up some interesting points. I think that there was a lot of emphasis on “Corporations” and not the people who are the driving force behind the corporation (even though that is the title of the film). “Corporations” don’t make the decisions to use sweatshops or aid Nazis, the people in place to make those decisions do. Ethics is a very big issue and I feel that it is only touched upon briefly at UNO. Is there a difference between business ethics and personal ethics? I certainly don’t think there should be, but it seems to me that there is a misconception that there is a special kind of ethics that only applies to business.

    I may be mistaken on this but I do not believe that Nike owns any of the factories that produce their products. This doesnt make the fact that the workers are payed so little any better. This does mean that although Nike has an incredible amount of buying power and can throw it’s weight around it is dealing with an intermediary that has significant control in pricing, conditions, and wages. I think that is important to note.

    Think about the corporations of the world like the people of the world. Sure, there are drug dealers, murderers, thieves and gems like Ted Haggard in this world. There are also great people who do extraordinary things like start charities and volunteer to help the less fortunate. Corporations are no different. There are extremely unethical ones and there are great corporations that strive for a greater good.

    I found Michael Moore’s ending commentary to be the most interesting part of the movie. He has made the networks and studios millions of dollars while making millions of dollars himself. If these corporations are so bad does that make him part of the problem? He looks at it as “ironic”. I think a better term for this is “hypocritical”.

    I think this film was worthwhile and a great assignment. I do think that anyone can tell you what the problem is, but what we really need is a solution and a plan.

  34. I did NOT enjoy watching the Corporation, part of which is my total dislike of Michael Moore. I feel that he uses brainwashing to make people believe his extreme (and quite honestly, deceiving) views.

    For instance, he wants us to have more governmental control rather than by use of privatization. Well… Lets look at the Rain Water incident of Bolivia. There are similar incidences of this all the time between states and water rights. Or country’s creating dams on rivers. So how is this any different. Lets just give all of our power to the government so they can do the same freakin thing.

    If it weren’t for corporations, we wouldn’t have even a close fraction of the products or services as we do today. Don’t tell me that the government can do a better job at creating a work force that would produce our goods. Aside from the corruption in the government, they are stuttering with the implimentation of computerized processes in their own departments.

    All in all, I disagree with most of the points brought forth, and choose not to listen to a person that uses the services of corporations to bite that hand that feeds him. I know he didn’t sit in his basment building the camera that he used for the recording. Guess what?—- A Corporation built that.

  35. Whatever a person believes, “The Corporation” should at least help them start asking questions. What do they believe? Where should corporations go from here? How much responsibility do corporations have?

    While watching the film, I found a few of the interviews very compelling. The first one was about privatizing everything. I thought the guy that said to privatize everything made a rational point. At first it seems crazy, but if you look at something like adopt a highway and apply the same logic to a river it makes pretty good sense. Most likely, the river would be owned by someone or a group that really cared about it. The second interview was about sustainability. This is an idea I really like and would like to see more companies move towards it.

  36. Trevor Luchsinger

    I thought that The Corporation was a very interesting movie. When they talked about sweatshops this was demonstrated in the movie when they were showing the articles of clothing used for campaigns within the company or corporation. They were explaining how a sport jacket was being sold for well over $100, while the person making that sport jacket only made 74 cents for making it. Now to me if there is anything considered a low wage, I think this would be one of them. I believe that this is self-explained in the fact that people are being underpaid in countries outside the U.S. for our advantage of not having to pay more for our finished product. Documentaries are really my thing but it was good.

  37. Jeremy Windeshausen

    Just as many others had stated, this movie was a real eye opener for me. I have always known that there was corruption and scandals in larger corporations but not to the extent shown. The most startling part of the movie was the portion about the FDA and their malpractice when it came to dairy products and known growth hormones. That occured in the latter part of the ninetys and was never publicly known, which is a scary thing. What else do larger corporations know that we dont, will we ever really find out?

  38. Lucas Corbett

    The only thing in this movie that really surprised me is the thing about the milk. Why are we still allowing this, if all these other countries are baning it? I know gold prices are now at an all time high but I wish I had invested in gold before 9/11….. everything is all about making money.

  39. I agree with Nick on the fact that privitizing everything from air to sea stood out in this movie. I think today’s world may have no choice but to privitize. I think it is terrible to be able to claim part of the atmosphere as belonging to a certain country or the middle of the ocean as belonging to someone. The man in the movie said that he believed everything will eventually be privatized and this seems so true. In today’s world countries and companies must do whatever it takes to claim what is their own or to claim as much as they can to come ahead. Eventually like the man said everything will eventually be privatized or so it seems.

    However what shocked me the most in thise movie was the company trying to claim a living thing as their property. I don’t recall the exact company but trying to claim a living thing created in a lab as your property and winning in a court case is unbelievable. I find it hard to believe

  40. Andrew Hutton

    I enjoyed a lot of the comments made during the movie, but they seemed awfully bias. The part that had the biggest impact on me was putting the steroids in the milk. I drink a lot of milk and didn’t want to hear that. I understand that they need to make milk to make money, and the more milk they make the more money they get, but I can’t believe they would put the health of the consumers in question for a little more money, also I can’t believe that they are allowed to continue doing it.

  41. The movie was interesting in some parts, but some parts were just more of the same information I get everyday. After watching the movie I realized just how much the “media” can be one sided. Yes it talked about the usual suspects about the “Evil Empire” of what a big business is, but what about some good things? Some big business in there search for more profit can turn out good innovations. Without striving for profits maybe we could never have seen such great innovations like the Personal Computer or even sliced bread. Without getting blinded by the bias of the producers of the documentaries and weeding out my own bias; it was a well produced movie.

  42. I thought the move “The Corporation” was well produced, however I thought it was biased, so if that was the goal of the directors then they accomplished their goal. I’ll be the first to admit that there are some bad corporations out there with bad people working for them, however that isn’t the standard but this movie seemed to make any and all corporations out to be evil.

    One thing that annoyed me was in chapter 13, Like a Good neighbor. A Vp for Pfizer was showing the camera around a neighborhood that it worked to improve, then towards the end of the chapter a gentlemen came on the screen. He said something along the lines that the money corporations use for charitable purposes should go to the government or taxpayers to decide. The man who said that lost all credibility to me after making that comment. The movie basically bashes corporations and gives reasons why, but when a corporation does something like give some of the profits back by way of community projects, they still get chastised about it and told it should be the government or taxpayers that should decide the use of that money. It really bothered me because if the corporation didn’t use that money for a charitable purpose, it could’ve easily distributed the money to shareholders or reinvested it. The fact they decided to share some of the profits of the community like that is admirable. Secondly, who says the government would be better at deciding how to use the money? The government can’t use tax dollars efficiently, they don’t need more money.

    I did think that IBM’s involvement in WW2 in Germany was surprising and wrong. At first i thought that they couldn’t help what their machines were being used for, but then when I heard they were printing cards with how people in concentration camps were being treated, that was shocking to me.

  43. The Corporation was a movie that really makes you think about what things are really like in the business world. The world is a money-hungry place. The only other documentary I watched before this was the one about 9-11. It really shocks me to know how much information is hidden from the general public, especially information that concerns public safety or health hazards. The part about the injections given to the milking cows and the fact the research couldn’t be aired on television was troublesome to me. I do think that it the movie went a little overboard when there was mention of the idea that we are “brainwashed” by advertisements. I do see that we can be influenced but we still have the ability to think things through and buy whatever we want. Most businesses just want to be the best at what they do and it’s just sad that higher profit is the standard for being the best.

  44. The documentary “The Corporation” was what I expected in general but more informative than anticipated. I never knew that publicly traded corporations were required by law to place the financial interests of their owners above competing interests. I also never knew that corporations are legally bound to make profit the bottom line ahead of everything else, even the public good. I have always understood the government and military were involved in everything that goes on around the world but not to this extent.

    In my education I was always taught that corporations are to be constructive members of society and they need to make a profit to help everyone in the long run. I have always been taught the ultimate goal in business is to minimize cost and maximize profit. I have been taught to be ethical and not make mistakes others have before me like Enron. I was not under the impression that a corporation should only obey the law if cost effective.

    I understand the harm to workers, human health, animals and the world’s biosphere. I liked the part where they said these things the public do not find out about because these things are not being traded. I was floored by the graphic pictures and corporation’s responsibility for our cancer epidemic. Essentially two out of every five people with get cancer in their life time due to the greed of money and power. Do stock holders and the government have a magical potion to protect themselves and their families?

    I was surprised that falsifying news is not against the law. There is so much conspiracy and secrecy. The public is lied to daily by people in power. I have always been aware the world economy controls and filters information through global media. There are not enough people making documentaries like this and not enough people willing to be accountable to educate the general population.

    I did think that this documentary was not as neutral as I hoped. It presented corporations as the bad guy majority of the film and there could be a reason but I would have liked to hear more of both sides. It is hard to think any one can make a difference. It seems impossible. It is scary to be exposed to the things that were presented in this video. Who wants to bring children into a world that has to fight and kill over water in less than 20 years? My way to make a difference is to communicate and educate others on the things that I have experienced and learned and always put ethics before money.

  45. Alex Williams

    The Corporation was an eye opener for me. I did not know that corporations ran their operations in such a way. The world is ran by money and thats all corporations want to acomplish, even if it is unethical, harming to the enviornment or wildlife. The part about Nike having sweat shops in third world countries was appaling. I had no clue the conditions were like that. Overall I learned quite a bit about the functions of some of the leading corporations in the nation and it was very interesting!

  46. This movie discussed many shocking things that are going on in the business world. What really caught my attention is the whole concept of privatization. Privatizing is good to a certain extent; seems like it’s going too far when the movie discussed privatizing part of the ocean or things of that nature.

    I have mixed feelings about paying workers lower wages in some countries. It see it as a good thing because they are more better off than what they otherwise would have been; but companies are using that to their advantage. Knowing what kind of conditions that most of those people are in, companies know then that the population would work for pretty much anything. Maybe the corporations are operating legally but not
    necessariy ethically.

    I was really shocked about putting steroids in milk, just so more milk can be produced. After watching that, drink milk becomes a little suspicious.

  47. I found most of this movie to be really interesting, we all know these things go on, but not who does them specifically and the implications we as consumers endure. I was really disgusted by the milk thing. I cannot believe that our government considers corporations as legal people, this truely means that no one has to pay the consequences of poor choices (that a real person made). I have always wanted to be an entrpreneur, but this really solidified it. I rather have to pay for the mistakes I make so that I don’t make them. Oh and the IBM supporting the holocaust, I was shocked.

  48. I thought the movie was interesting, but extremely one sided. It’s easy to highlight all the evil things corporations do and ignore the good. However, I do agree many corporations seem to have an attitude of only short term returns, with little regard for the future. These attitude needs to change, and I believe they can. I loved the fact that the gentleman from the carpet company completely changed his views, and now is directing his company to become self sustainable by 2020. It proves that some of these successful companies and especially the people behind them still have a chance to add a positive impact to the global community.

  49. I thought the movie was very interesting and opened the eyes of a lot of people who watched it. The story about the fox news team and milk production in our country was almost so disgusting that it was unbelievable. To think that a company would act in that way and a news station would cover up their true findings is insane. I also thought the movie was a little too one-sided and didn’t at least mention some of the positive aspects that coporations offer. My favorite part of the whole thing though was the interview with the CEO of the carpet company and how his feelings and actions changed over time. It really showed there are some people out there who care and are attempting to make a difference.

  50. Nick Stoysich

    I thought this movie was very interesting. I was surprised that the government views a corporation as a person. I don’t understand how a corporation can really be viewed as a single person. I also think the movie highlights very well, companies are most interested in their returns rather than people and the world around them. That being said I think the movie was a little one sided and also did not give adequate representation to what good things corporations do.

  51. Megan Weatherwax

    I thought this movie was very interesting. It definately opened my eyes viewing through a different light. It was funny how they compared corporations to a psychopath yet in a weird sense many of the things they hit home on were true. I can’t believe the measly amount they pay foreign factory workers, it’s amazing they have never put themselves in their shoes. That part really got me. Would these CEOs ever let their sons or daughters work in that kind of environment for that kind of money. I mean some of these workers were 13 years old! Unreal. I do agree with Nick on how it was more onsided. They never do mention the good.

  52. When I watched the movie The Corporation, I was reminded of the concept of monopolization from my Marketing Management course. The chapter of the video titled “Boundaries” demonstrates that corporations will build anywhere and continue to expand, regardless of the effect it may have on the economy and/or the environment. The constant struggle to take ownership of as much land/market space as possible has become very prominent in today’s economy and names such as Wal-Mart, Pfizer, and Starbucks have made such headlines.
    The concept of monopolization was demonstrated once again in the movie when discussing the common mindset of corporations. The general “mindset” is that corporations want money, and by monopolizing the market and gaining the most information about their competitors, they are able to do so. Creatively, these corporations will go to great lengths to obtain information that will put them ahead of the rest-for example, a “central intelligence agent” will act as a spy to obtain what they need to be on top.
    Overall, I thought this was an excellent display of the various aspects of corporations. There are many attributes to recognize when dealing with the modern corporation. There are also things about corporations that have led modern-day society to perceive them as negative and greedy. By analyzing the forces behind much of the activity produced by corporations, we are offered better insight on how to combat and improve on these negative images.

  53. The movie brings up several great examples of the enormous damage that large corporations can create. However, it failed to provide a solution to the problem. If large corporations are disposed of, what will we put in their place in the economy?
    Being human institutions, corporations are bound to make mistakes and poor choices. It is the job of those inside and outside the corporation to observe the progress of these large businesses and help to call the mistakes when we see them. This is exemplified by this documentary, albeit in a rather propagandized way. Checks and balances exist in our society to moderate the effect of human error – We should all make better use of them.

  54. Before watching the film, I was not expecting to see all the negative aspects of corporations. I think they are a great way of building wealth in our economy and I don’t agree on some of the topics that were represented. Without corporations, where would we stand relative to other countries? Would we be able to maintain such a high standard of living? I doubt it. I do agree corporations and/or managers can be greedy sometimes and they tend to disregard the shareholder’s needs. Overall, I found the film to be informative and it made me realize the conflict of interest for corporation’s existence in our society.

  55. Farrukh Kamolov

    This was very interesting documentary to watch. It is surprising what companies might do in order to earn bigger profit. This movie mainly talks about manufacturing companies, and how unethical they are. On other hand, manufacturing companies always were polluting water and air, I think they don’t do it intentionally. Movie only talks about bad corporations; it doesn’t say a word about other good companies. The corporations provide people with job, and some of them pay a good wages. Ethical companies deserve a credit too.
    After watching this movie, most people might find out how bad Nike is, but I am pretty sure that almost everybody would still will buy Nike’s shoes.

  56. I was taken back by the information provided in this documentary. It was disurbing seeing the effects that corporations ultimately have on people around the world and the environment that surrounds us. Corporations are taking advantage of cheap labor and sweatshops around the world. Garments and products that are sold at high retail prices are usually only valued at under a dollar. This just shows how unethically corporations act in order to create profits for shareholders and such.

  57. Scott Stronck

    This movie depicts what some corporations are about. Some get greedy and become to worried about profit maximization and tend to forget about their employees and benefits. I think many of us, or people we know have experienced some form this unproper business operation. It was terrible to see the movie and exactly how far it can be taken. Although none of us have probably experienced anything to that magnitude, I believe that some corporations take away from our lifestyle and really force employees into pressure situations.

  58. The main issue i kept thinking to myself during and after this movie was how disturbing the lack of ethical behavior can be in corporations. there was one part where a speaker said what does it matter is i point a gun at you shoot you and kill you now or knowningly kill you slowly with my product. The disregard for the human race as a whole people is rediculous by some big corporations. Now not all big corporations are bad, dont get me wrong, but i think that a lot of corporations need to step back look at what is best for our people and economy, instead of the bottom line.

  59. Dan Sundermeier

    The corporation was an interesting movie. It kept my attention throughout the whole thing. One highlight of the movie to me was the growth hormone injected into cows. The investagatory film crew tried to report that this was being used and actually caused cancer. The company would not allow this and took them to court. The manufacturers of this hormone had a scary influence over Fox. It amazes me that Fox actually won the appeal in the court case after releasing the two reporters for not reporting lies.

  60. I believe the movie “The Corporation” was very informative in letting its viewers see the misconduct and irresponsibility that is going on in today’s business world. It is important to seee the many lengths corporations will go to earn a profit and attain substanial growth. If we as a people are to move towards the future in regards to enviromental aspects and human rights aspects then we better start taking a closer look at changing the corporate objectives.

  61. Eraj Tabaraliev

    This movies main purpose is to show people about bad side of corporations, and they did a good job. There is also another side of corporations – contribution to the US economy. The US economy do depend on corporations a lot, which might be the reason why government favoring them too much.

    There is also an ethical issue pictured in the movie – starvation wages. Compare to the US wages, people who make those products get very little. When you compare to their home wages, it is good and at least it keeps them alive. There should be something done about it, and I think only consumers have power to “fix” that, not the government.

  62. abusinessprofessor

    WSJ recently published data on the annual executive compensation at the largest public U.S. companies. For those who are interested, the complete article can be found at:

  63. Shailendu Shroff

    This movie can be considered as a post-mortem analysis of a business entity and its various features in terms of processes, departments, people and external affiliations. We see that a corporation is defined to be a general/benefit for all kind of organization that has been given the legal authority to do so by the government. What we see is the stark reality of the business organizations, which have re-defined the US business world by its pure desire of generating profits. This path particularly can be obtained at the expense of many a broken relationship, bending rules and laws and also engaging in practices, which are unethical and harmful to the public. It is obvious that there are many a flaws in the business world across the globe (not only USA) and hence we are plagued with the problem of what should an ideal corporation be and what should it do given that they are always pressing for more (profits and heightening business). There is no way that there can be an ideal corporation given that no one thinks transparently and benignantly.

    The current debate is on whether corporations are responsible to contribute to corporate social responsibility and to what extent. There are numerous companies which engage in the same, but many a times this happens to cover up a misdeed of their past or to improve their image in society. We need to realize that corporations do not engage in CSR purely from a charity standpoint; they have vested interests to be tapped into. There is no rationale for them to go out of the way to help the general public, if they cannot get something back in return in terms of free advertising, company promotion, tax benefits, political favor, etc. Multinational companies tend to engage in CSR in such a way that they do so in countries where CSR is required and counts in society existence, however they simply ignore it in developing and third world countries. Such a dual faced hypocrisy can be misleading. Hence from an overall perspective a corporation must engage in corporate social responsibility in a honest and innocent manner that goes well with society ideals and values; there should not be an intention to gain something out of it.

  64. This movie tells you about problems which you might face while working for corporations. I was really shocked after knowing that how much power corporations have. I found that IBM story very interesting that how they leased computer systems to the German Nazi’s to keep track of people in the concentration camps. That is really bad that IBM in Germany knew what was going on but it did nothing to stop it. The company just wanted to make profits and was not hesitating to help the group to kill others.

    According to me government should get involved and help the customers and citizens of the country. There are people who do extraordinary things like start charities and do some other volunteer work also and same is with the corporations. If there are some good corporations then there are unethical ones as well. I think every consumer should watch this movie to make them aware that corporations care about profits more than anything.

  65. Jeanette Cole

    The movie “The Corporation” is a documentary on the history and current impact that corporations have on society. The movie gives a very thorough history and research on the background and the current impact that corporations have on our society and societies around the world. In the film the makers portray a corporation as an evil entity that is set out to dominate and destroy by any means necessary. Describing this as the “corporate agenda,” the film points out how corporations have enormous power over individuals and other companies in today’s era.
    In part of the film the makers examine some case studies around corporations and their actions. Some important points that the filmmakers point out from these studies is that corporations often show some of the following traits: “callous unconcern for the feelings of others, incapacity to maintain enduring relationships, reckless disregard for the safety of others, deceitfulness, repeated lying, and conning others for profit.” While not all corporations carry such a rap sheet, many of today’s corporations do carry such a burden and the film points this out well.
    The film continues with the psychology behind a corporation, looking at such things as the mindset of a corporation and the people serving within the corporation. The film also mentions the boundaries of corporations, stating the question of who creates wealth and how? The film really brings up the ethical issues that corporations are faced with. Some that are mentioned have to deal with unethical marketing practices, manipulating the system, insider trading, polluting the environment, environmental credits, etc.
    Along the lines of this film is the notion of Corporate Social Responsibility. Just what is a corporation responsible for and how is a corporation supposed to act and implement decisions, based on the idea of corporate social responsibility, is something that this film alludes to. Corporations that are seen as having corporate social responsibility have been identified or seen by outsiders as being responsible to others. The question then arises, of who are these corporations or legal “persons” responsible to, and who holds these “persons” accountable for their actions. The end of the film suggests that we (the people watching the film), are the ones that need to hold corporations responsible for their actions and get the world back into out own hands.

  66. james o'neill

    Blog 8 – The Corporation (Corporate Social Responsibility)
    The Corporation is a very intriguing movie for both opponents and proponents of big business, as it highlights various issues that arise with such monumental concentrations of power that aren’t routinely focused on or discussed. Amongst other things, it focuses on the role of major corporations in respect to society with the viewpoint that the collective ‘corporation’ should be viewed in its actions as any other human being should. Robert Hare, a respected psychology professor, gives his assessments of the collective corporation in relation to an individual with psychopathic tendencies, and by doing this he acts to demonize big business.
    Should corporations take on similar responsibilities to America’s everyman? The question is a fiercely debated one, and I personally feel that yes, they definitely should. If corporations operate under the same legal system that individuals do, then why should they receive perks, receive certain exemptions, etc., that the average individual does not? I’m a firm believer that with power comes a great deal of responsibility. It is an ethical issue to debate so there is no clear cut answer, merely opinion, but mine is strong in this direction. Wherever the most money (and consequentially power) lies, the examples should be set on how issues should be addressed and how companies should act with respect to other countries, companies, and individuals. The ramifications of those in power in every realm of professional life are felt as they reverberate with the most publicity and force and they should undoubtedly feel the pressure to act in what is widely considered ethical terms. Whether it is a groundbreaking scientist, an acclaimed poet, a political leader, or a powerful corporation, those with the most visibility are often those who are so often duplicated, so these are the entities that should hold the highest moral and ethical values.

  67. The Corporation is a documentary which reveals the history of the corporation and how corporation makes profit. Nowadays corporation is like “a person”. It has its rights and responsibilities. In the film, corporation is evaluated by a list which psychologist used to measure the psychopath. There are lots of symptoms of corporation. Each symptom could be supported by many specific examples. Frankly speaking, this documentary leaves numerous thoughts to audience. I was shocked by several scenes and sorrowed for Earth. There are so many pollutions and so many destructions of ecosystems. People consider corporations as giant monsters. They would do everything to generate profits. One of the solutions to reverse their image is corporate social responsibility, CSR. By introducing CSR to public, it does not only show the responsibility to stakeholders but also to the whole society. For instance, Cisco mentioned on their website that they aim to build a global environment by strategic investments to education, economic development and also human needs. They build partnership with nonprofit organizations by providing a bunch of supportive actions combining people, products and cash to make best use of community-building initiatives. Cisco wins Corporate Social Responsibility Awards in 2007 and 2008 consecutively and creates a good reputation in people’s mind.

  68. Wen-Ting (Doris) Wei

    This documentary film evaluates the modern-day corporation by regarding it as a person to see what kind of person it is. The film shows the development of the corporation as a legal entity, gives many real world business examples, and features interviews with prominent corporate critics. A corporation has legal entity but doesn’t have ethic and moral itself. Perhaps the management of a corporation are nice guys, but the institute they operate is a cold devil because their main task is to pursuit the maximum profit. They might lower the cost by damage the environment, exploiting the employees, using inferior material; they might increase revenue by publishing exaggerate advertisement or manipulating the financial statements. They could do anything in order to achieve the purpose. This film points out the following ways to correct a corporation’s bad behavior: the emergence of managers’ conscience, the protest of consumers, whistle blowing, and the punishment of the law…etc. I think that the management should always remind themselves of the social responsibility and other visions why the company is there, by which some unethical behavior could be offset.

  69. Lindsay Burleson

    The sheer complexity of this movie makes it difficult to comment about. This documentary touches upon numerous topics from corporate legality to the evolution of corporations to theroletical framework concerning the future of the corporation. The movie jumps around lot, even though the producers have structured titles and topics. I like this movie because it semmed to have solid proof and uncovered information about the so called “evil” side of business. It is definately an eye opener, even for the most cynical business student. The neglect of corporate responsibilty is astounding. Even though I have learned the theory of economics and business operations over the past 5 years and understand that EVERYTHING is a business decision, including environmental concerns, it is disgusting to think that moral decisions are based on cost. If the cost of the court decision is less than the act itself, no matter the ethical consequences, some companies will take the low role. I also like the array of people interviewed. It really gives a well rounded view ot “The Corporation”.
    On the other hand, I feel the documentary is very one sided. In the introduction, the corporation is said to yield both good and bad consquences, yet the whole movie seems to bring out the bad. My opinions may be biased because I am an MBA student, but I strongly believe that this business evolution is occuring in the manner that it is for a reason. There definately needs to be measures in place to keep the progession on the right track, but without this change, the world as a whole would not be the innovative place it is today.

  70. The movie starts out with how corporations are defended as a few “bad apples”, bruised but sweet, but lists so many companies as examples to show how these few “bad apples” are actually very prevalent. It goes on to discuss how corporations are a key part of the puzzle and sarcastically mentions positives before continuing to bash these large organizations – stating that they are just there to make money and nothing else…
    The movie then goes into their history, stating that they originated as a public charter that was extremely restrictive and there to serve the public and how the industrial revolution grew these corporations and these constraints were then removed through an argument that corporations were a “legal person” and due to the 14th amendment they deserved rights… Then through various examples the movie goes on to show how this “person” would be a psychopath how exploits labor under the assumptions of helping the community, disregards other’s safety (chemicals), regards laws under risk/return and thus breaks them, destroy the earth, and manipulate people. The movie, now having stated its case, continues (for way too long), re-emphasizing these points and showing various examples…

  71. Tzu-Chuan Chiu (Anson)

    The Corporation is a documentary film that focuses on the importance of social responsibilities companies should care. This film criticizes corporations that produce many pollutants, toxics, and carcinogens, and do not obey the law just because they can be more cost effective. The film tries to blame those unethical companies make profit at other people’s expenses, for example, pollute other country’s environment and hire child labors. Indeed, some bad apples create persistent problems and these problems should be fixed as soon as possible. However, in my view point, the movie puts too much negative impression about the corporations, but ignores the positive side or the benefit brought by corporations. Personally I don’t think all the information played in this film are correct, because very few chemicals are proved to be the potential carcinogens. Those chemicals were banned due to another reason. But I agree that all companies should do their best to create value not problems to people, and the companies should hold social responsibilities.

  72. Jun (Kurt) Guo

    This is a very impressive and meaning documentary. It gives us something to think about because in the end, change rests with future business professionals. The major view of this story is focus on the way that big companies from the first world build their happiness on the pain of people who are from the third world. There are several examples in the movie improving this point. Today, corporations are in fact creating more value, but the back-end costs are greater than the value produced. A lot of heavy metal industries built their factories in the third world, where they can hire low price labor and also bring pollution to other countries. The background of this movie is to indicate that the whole asset of human beings, including physical and mental, will become to be part of a company’s property. They have to agree whatever the firm needs. And for most of multinational companies, they do not have any idea about ethical. Societies demand for more efficiency, speed, and affordability in the goods and services we consume on a daily basis create opportunities for these corporations to capitalize on.

  73. In my opinion, the first impression of this movie is the inspiration. Definitely, when it refers to firms, people always think them as human beings, such as the energy of Nike, the taste of Apple, and so on. However, an organization is only an organizational form; it does not have any character, let alone ethical. The employers and employees may all have very high ethical. But when they are organized under a specific company, because of the point of company benefit, they all may become different people. There are also some very good examples in the movie showing this point. Although the business is bad for environment, the employers can be very nice and good people. It sounds very ridicules, but it does happen in the reality.
      I am not sure whether there is a very true way to solve this problem. The company is an organizational form. Not only companies do business regardless ethical, but also a lot of countries also do the same way: because of some benefits, they would like to gain profits based on other people’s pain. Recently, I think the most efficient way to ease external problem is not to claim what should do ethically and what should not do, but use market tools based on the profits to leverage different benefits among various entities. However, there is something that never can be eliminated, which is the person’s selfish. Besides ethical, there is another thing that can be used to improve the society, which is the passion I think. It seems like the value of this movie. Trough watching this movie, audience would probably be moved somehow. Although it can not solve the problem, it at least leads people to realize the problem, and then they will start to think about this question. I think it is much better than just know nothing about the environment.

  74. The Corporation is a documentary that explains the dilemma that faces corporations between pleasing shareholders and doing what is right for social responsibility. The movie goes through each detail about how the corporations operate and that nearly every facet of the business can be improved by avoiding some aspect of social responsibility. It does say that action can be taken and that it is the responsibility of government to align social responsibility with pleasing shareholders.

    This movie provides a background of the history of corporations and the privatization of many aspects of daily life. However, it does not necessarily say that it is the entire responsibility of the corporation, but that it is more the responsibility of the government. From this perspective it stems the most important aspect, which is as individuals we have a role in making sure that the social responsibility is met. Although as individuals we are able to do nothing within a corporation, we have an active role in government and can use this role to influence change.

  75. Quite foreboding. So essentially corporations are evil? No. While corporations are legally considered “persons,” I think it is hardly correct to qualify them as such. The notion that a corporation is a sociopath fails to consider the purpose of a corporation: the bottom line. What is the meaning of life? The purpose of our being? We don’t know. It could be a number of things, all things, or nothing. But a corporation’s existence has purpose: profit, very much the way a shark’s purpose is to hunt and consume. You cannot lampoon an organism for behaving according the mechanics of its construction.

    The extent to which a corporation can exploit human beings is determined SOLELY by the government (or lack thereof) of a given nation. If you put 10 children and a dog with no leash in the same room, someone is bound to get hurt. Governments need to put leashes on corporations. There is a big difference between being a living, breathing being and being considered a legal person. Legal in no way implies moral, and that is the mistake many people make when criticizing corporations. You cannot judge an entity based on ethics if that entity is incapable of having or understanding ethics. The law is the law; ethics is determined by one’s predisposition to accept the various moralities to which it has been exposed. And morality is largely a construct of the arbitrary characteristics one has been born into (sex, class, origin, geographic location, natural aptitude, etc.) Corporations don’t possess the capacity for ethics, and as such, should not be expected to be socially responsible.

    Corporate social responsibility should be lauded by those firms that practice it; however, in the case of those that don’t, there is no reasonable punishment to be meted out. Take the IBM case mentioned in the documentary, for example. IBM was mailing out these punch cards to Nazi Germany, which in turn used them to organize the systematic destruction of a race of human beings. However, there’s no evidence indicating that IBM knew what these cards were being used for. How could any company possibly foresee the use of a punch card in genocide? Even if IBM knew, it is governed by its bottom line, there is no system of ethics to guide a corporation to make what human persons would consider the right decision. IBM does not care what the cards are used for; IBM is incapable of caring.

    There will always be positive and negative externalities; it’s just how the world works. To blame this on corporations is a cop-out by governments and people who refuse to address the real issue: human and government inaction. Corporations are machines; while they are legally “persons,” they do not function as human beings. To expect a computer, or a toaster, or a car to have ethics is absurd. So why a corporation?

  76. The 2003 documentary film The Corporation critiques the modern-day corporation, considering its behavior towards society and the world at large as a psychologist might evaluate an ordinary person. The main point that the directors make is that a corporation is more or less a sociopath (i.e., callous unconcern for the feelings of others, incapacity to maintain enduring relationships, reckless disregard for the safety of others, incapacity to experience guilt, etc.). While some of the directors’ points were valid, there were a number of logical flaws in many of their arguments.

    First, if a corporation is inherently evil would that not make human beings inherently evil because a corporation is essentially a human construct? Second, why was such little attention given to the role of governments in regulating corporations? Corporations will, in most cases, do the bare minimum when it comes to upholding laws, regulations, and standards because to do otherwise could potentially jeopardize their profitability (i.e., costly to operate under certain legal parameters), market share, competitive position, and ultimately their existence.

    I agree with the directors that corporations should be sustainable, but the burden should fall entirely on the government to pass laws, which will ensure this outcome. The problem is corrupt politicians who accept bribes and campaign contributions (i.e., essentially the same thing) from corporations when they should be focusing on creating legislation, which will shield society from negative externalities. Capitalism is the driving force behind innovation. In the communist nation of Cuba, there is little incentive to work other than the threat of being thrown in prison because the government takes whatever wealth an individual accumulates for him or herself. Ultimately, the most efficient economic system is one that combines the spirit of capitalism, but that has enough regulation so that society is protected from negative externalities.

  77. There is a myriad of controversial topics that could be discussed from the movie “The Corporation,” but there is one quote that stood out to me the most — “In devastation there is opportunity.” As heartless as it sounds, I agree with it and don’t necessarily believe it’s a bad thing, as long as people aren’t being unreasonably taken advantaged of. I say “unreasonably” because essentially everyone is being taken advantaged of in life every single day. We overpay for every single purchase we make. Every marketing campaign also takes advantage of the human mind, as it plays on our emotions and thoughts. However, our society has deemed this as acceptable and the norm. Now going back to my first point about devastation creating opportunities, I believe that it’s natural to seize the opportunity when presented with one. As spoken about in the movie, you can’t blame the traders for being happy about the rise in gold prices, despite the tragedy of 9/11. I think of the situation as seeing the silver lining or seeing the glass half-full. It’s not like the traders are the ones that implemented the 9/11 attacks. If I come off as heartless, I attribute it to society for making people so money-driven and focused.

  78. “The Corporation” is a fun look at how corporations are destroying the world. Basically it shows how corporations run most of the known world. The movie starts out with the history of corporations, and how their power grows substantially after World War Two. According to the film, most of the world’s governments and job markets are run or at least affected by corporate power. This film touches on social irresponsibility, environmental destruction, international sweat shops, and the behaviour of these corporations about these issues. The film has two lines: the independent spirit, and the corporate buy-in. The highest point of the film was the Water Monopolization in Bolivia, which is a tragic story where citizens were not even allowed to collect rainwater so they could have fresh drinking water because of a corporate monopoly in their area. We just want Corporations to make profits in a responsible way and not destroy and plunder the earth’s resources while doing it. Is it really not that difficult. And yes, it will cost a bit more money, not to just dump affluent in a river or belch fumes into the air. However, in the end you will have healthy happy consumers.

  79. Philip St. Clair

    A movie such as this has to be taken in stride. It is always possible to manipulate any set or group of people or information in any way, shape or form that you like. This is referred to as spin. The movie itself brings a lot of interesting topics and facts to the forefront, however the take away points are not all clear and at times the information was overwhelming and took away from the message.
    With that being said, my own take on corporations and corporate social responsibility remains unchanged. It is true that corporations are in a way an actual legal entity similar to a person. And I would argue that this is not all that bad. It is not corporations that we owe part of our first world lifestyle too? Sure, corporations are not always ethical or even legal, but then again the world is full of individual who break the law and break their own moral values. What I am trying to say is that corporations, even the ones that are discusses in this film, have a responsibly to maximize profit for shareholders. It is ultimately the consumer’s decision and right to decide whether or not to sponsor/patronize this company. If you do patronize a company that practices poor CSR than you are saying that CSR is not so important to you so that you either spend a few dollars more, or spend a few minutes doing research. In the end, society can be hypocritical and want a company to practice CSR, as long as it does not adversely affect them in any way.
    Most people in the world are good people. But even good people can be insensitive, greedy and the like. People will do what is best for them and think about what is best for others afterwards. This is how corporations act and is no different that the world as a whole.

  80. Ariana Axelrod

    I do not agree with alot of the points the documentary “The Corporation” makes. Yes, there are several “bad eggs” within the corporate world, but the documentary tends to portray all corporations as evil. Without these “evil” corporations our country, or really any country, would not be able to run. The main goal of a corporation is to make money. Not only is that the goal of any particular corporation, but it is the goal of pretty much every living person. Most people will do anything to be successful, even if it means at someone else’s expense. So yes, there are corporations that take advantage of third world countries, and yes there are corporations that cause pollution, and maybe those corporations should monitor these actions, but essentially what needs to be done is done in order to run these companies. Furthermore, it is the government’s responsibility to pass laws and enforce and regulate them. Any one person who does not have rules that are enforced, along with any one corporation that has no limitations, is going to run wild with it and do whatever they feel is necessary. Therefore, this documentary is one sided and extremely biased and portrays corporations in a light that is unwarranted.

  81. While The Corporation is keeping its cool, you slowly stew in your seat, having been at least dimly, diffusedly aware — as the kind of thinking, connected person who watches documentaries in the first place — of what was going on but still stunned by the smack in the face this film is. When the film is funny, it’s in that way that makes you want to curl up in bed and cry. It’s hard not to be dispirited and disheartened, hard not to feel helplessly paralyzed when the omnipresence of global corporations with fingers in many, many pots seems to make it impossible to be a thoughtful, vigilant consumer short of moving to the mountains and growing your own vegetables.

    There are hints of hope, though, suggestions for strategies for remedying this mess we’ve gotten ourselves into. There’s Ray Anderson, the CEO of Interface, the world’s largest commercial carpet manufacturer — one of the very few corporate heroes here, he calls himself, shockingly, a “plunderer,” an intergenerational tyrant who is helping to hand an environmentally ravaged planet to our grandchildren… but he’s trying to change that, attempting to reduce the impact his corporation has. He may even succeed. He’s part of the rallying cry that The Corporation encompasses, the beginning of a battle that many of us didn’t even know was looming, and that this powerful film is very persuasive in convincing us must be won at all costs.

  82. The Corporation is a movie about the alleged evils of corporations in America. It examines several situations that find corporations at fault in several instances, from the disintegration of grass roots business opportunities and monopolization of markets to the exploitation of third world countries and playing a significant role in the perpetuation of the American class system that sees the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
    The corporation is seen as a pinnacle of the free enterprise system. It is an all-encompassing force that, whether we would like to admit it or not, contributes to the desecration of variation and individuality on a world wide scope. More troubling than the amalgamation of different cultural elements into one big, more easily accessible market, the corporation is itself one big conflict of interest in respect to human welfare. If it is a corporation’s job to care for its stock holders and maximize profit, then it should go to every length to make this possible – as the film showed, is almost always at the cost of human welfare. Corporate responsibility should be about making sure no person, even in the smallest faction of the system, is compromised in order to maximize profit. As the film indicates, big changes need to be made in order to ensure this moral responsibility, before monetary responsibility, is implemented.

  83. Corporate is a movie which talks about the kind of decisions corporations take in order to maximize the profit .But I don’t really agree to the way the movie only shows the bad things that happen in a corporate. Being a business student I look forward to joining a corporate and understand that a corporation’s first aim is to maximize the profits for its shareholders .In order to do so corporations have to do things which might not be completely correct as far as ethics are concerned but we need to realize that running a business and working towards the goal of being the number one in your industry has a lot to do with making the most effective decisions and these may involve taking steps which might appear to be as taking advantage of third world countries etc. However, I do know of a lot of corporations who do contribute a lot for social welfare and I don’t really agree with the image of corporate shown in this movie.

  84. Anthony Olenik

    The corporation is an entity that in reality functions with almost the same rights as a human being under U.S. law. Since the corporation protects its shareholders from being directly held accountable to a great extent, for questionable, unethical, and unlawful actions, this legal entity has received much bad press for decades. The Corporation profiles much of the wrongs done in this world by businesses. We are always taught ethics and corporate social responsibility as a new generation of business managers, with only case studies to back up the reasons for the lessons. This film is strongly one-sided, but worth watching because an entire semester class of ethical wrongs is profiled in about two hours.

    The questions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) are: why and how often should it be practiced by companies? Many shareholders worry nothing about CSR because they see it as a drain of funds. It is not the company’s moral obligation to safeguard all stakeholders, only to maximize shareholder wealth. Sometimes this is done by any means necessary. The countering reasons to practice CSR are to safeguard and enhance a company’s reputation, and it can usually be done in a sustainable and profitable manner. Happy stakeholders are more willing to support a company and this can build a loyal clientele base. Ethically, CSR should always be practiced. Financially though this is not always feasible. More and more corporations and their shareholders are approving of CSR practices because of the tangible benefits of keeping stakeholders content and a positive image that is generated.

  85. The Corporation is similar to the Michael Moore school of documentaries. It basically presents “the corporation” in a negative manner and personifies it as an evil, profit driven entity. Although, they do “somewhat” present a positive angle but it’s not really a fair & balanced viewpoint. Much like most Michael Moore films, The Corporation is meant to scare and shock you and that’s precisely what it accomplishes.

    I agree with with what Naveen had to say above, I don’t think we can chastize corporations for their actions in an unregulated market. Hey, if there is a problem with the way they do business, then there must be new regulation to deal with these transgressions. However, the question arises “Shouldn’t management act responsibly and make ethical and moral decisions?” And you know what, they probably should but that wouldn’t be acting in the best interest of their company. So, I don’t blame management for trying to maximize profits by “getting away with” as much as they can. It makes perfect sense. Is it right? Probably not but I have accepted it as an inevitability. Fortunately, I feel that in recent years, an increasing number of corporations have been acting more responsibly and have given back to the communities that gave them so much. So, there may be some light at the end of this “evil” and dark tunnel.

    Although, I was actually mortified by one part of this documentary and that was when a commodities broker was talking about positive business prospects in the wake of 9/11. Seriously, the worst attack on U.S. soil and this guy is thinking about how the price of gold is going to shoot up. It just shows how conditioned we have become as a culture to crave money and material things. That may be the problem. Ever since I was a child, I have been pressured to succeed. I had to be an architect or a doctor or a lawyer. What ever happened to just getting a stable job and being happy? No, we have to have the new iPOD and a new car every 2 -3 years and the newest tech goodies. It’s sickening but we are being conditioned to covet our neighbors possessions. Ironically, I will be part of the reason some of you will buy stuff because I’m getting into advertising. So, when you wake up in the morning and you eat Honey Bunches of Oats instead of Cheerios, you remember that I guided you in making that purchase.

    P.S. Or, Penelope Ann Miller was in significant movies after Other People’s Money including “Carlito’s Way.”

  86. Serdar Sonmez

    I think the documentary really tried to make the corporations look evil. Of course there are limits to what you can do such as in sweatshops, environment, pollution….etc.
    Like couple of my classmates mentioned, IBM should not care where their computers or cards are being used. There should be nothing wrong to advertise for children since they have no power on buying (unless the advertising is focusing on alcohol or tobacco products). Now child labor is a different story and let’s look at it from two different perspective. What would those family do without the corporations bringing jobs there? What would corporations do, without having cheap labor? It can obviously be win win situation, with some international regulations, such as providing them a healthier environment, educational programs, family supports….etc.
    Polluting in different countries has been a big issue in 3rd world countries and even in some european countries like Italy. Some corporations pay the mob some money to be able to dump their toxic materials in their lands. In Italy they have discovered toxic dumps, within the past 10 years, totals twice the size of Mount Everest.
    Of course some corporations will do anything (ethical or unethical) to make profit, while most corporations in my opinion, aim to make profits while having some sort of social responsibilities. Just like it was mentioned in the documentary, many CEO’s and the boards do worry about the things that social activists so as well, we just need to meet in the reasonible point that works for everyone by being objective.

  87. Edward Centofante

    Another one-sided hit piece on corporate America. Sigh.

    Of course this one hits all the right buttons. Corporations are made up of heartless suits who exploit third world countries, the environment, and humanities own materialistic drives. The problem with this movie, much like Mr. Moore’s mockumentary, is that it doesn’t preach a middle ground. It sets out with a goal of converting viewers into anti-corporate zealots, nodding their heads in unison at their socialist political leaders who tell them “Nany Gov’ment” can make everything better.


    While the movie tries to distort reality by making it seem like our current corporate market is completely unregulated and in desperate need of some “heroic” politicians to step in and fix the mess, the reality is we’re already in a good place. We’re occupying a middle ground where the free market is agreed to in principle, with reasonable controls placed upon corporations to keep them with current standard of ethical behavior. And that’s enough.

    Corporations are a central pillar of humanity, and humanity has been around for enough millenia and survived through enough strife that we should have the maturity and patience to endure a handful of “bad apples” long enough to weed out their exploits. through the legal process.Taking the extremist position that we need to put flawed, greedy, biased, and vain politicians (good representatives of humanity in general) in charge of running this central pillar of humanity is impatient, immature, and dangerous.

    In conclusion, while I respect the fact that there are “bad apples” out there, I categorically reject the inherent argument that corporations are the problem. Corporations are a tool, and we need to learn how to use them properly – and that takes time. Look what we’ve done in the last century and ask yourself if we haven’t progressed.

  88. Jennifer Gilligan

    This movie talks about how numerous corporations have made unethical and selfish decisions that lead to their downfall. It focuses on the fact that corporations are legally considered individuals. I think that in some ways we can compare corporations to people. Like people some corporations are good while others are evil. In the movie they focused more on the evil corporations rather than the good.

    What is a corporation’s social responsibility? According to its legal terms a corporation only responsibility is to make a profit for its shareholders even if that means putting the company’s success before the good of the public. Comparing this to a person, if put in a tough spot of doing something unethical and keeping your job, many people would choose the unethical route. It is not always because they are a bad person but because they put themselves, and probably their families, before the good of everyone else. Corporations like people will more often think of themselves first and then take into consideration how it will affect others.

  89. Venkata S Mudunuru

    Yes, like most of my classmates said above, “The Corporation” movie potrays the negative side of corporate. But isn’t it the definition of a corporation is that “it is a legal entity created to provide capital to businesses in return for future profits for the providers of capital i.e., shareholders.” By law, the corporation must strive to make a profit for its shareholders. The aim of Corporations is different from Non-Profit organizations who are keen about the social issues rather than profits. Then should the executive management give away money out of the sheer goodness of their hearts. Quite clearly, therefore, any spend on the health and safety of employees, social responsibility, or environmental/ “green” themes, must be made with the intention of increasing future profits. The corporation is bound to do such as earning profits and maximizing sahreholders value is its primary function. Corporate executives often pay lip service to these themes with the intention of drawing favorable response from the buying public – thus enhancing their profit. Yeah, on the other hand they still need to balance that none of the stakeholders are affected negatively or caused any trouble due to its operations and decisions. It is evident that nowadays many firms are giving higher priority to Corporate Social responsibility and they are even releasing annual Corporate Social Rsponsibility Reports as they are viewing their CSR activities as a key to achieve higher ratings and improve the brand image.

  90. The movie deserves reward because it diligently combines a lot of parts of films and interview in order to present the whole picture of what the corporation is. Though the time frame of the movie is a little bit long, I can understand the thought the director wants to convey to people the large anxiety and concerns about the social issues.
    I care more about the issue that corporations bring to pollute and damage the Earth. It is not until the climate change that environmental sustainable development becomes a hot issue. People now ask corporations to take social responsibility. Besides, the shortage of oil and the emission of CO2 all make the traditional industries that heavily depend on raw materials facing necessary change in the coming future. And it is quite clear that developing substitute energy and saving energy is becoming edge’ cutting. For example, solar energy and the use of food fuel probably become alternatives energy. And the hybrid cars can reduce the dependence of oil. Now more and more companies are gradually conscious about the environmental protection as very important social responsibility. In fact, the accompanying benefits according the change could be even huge: reducing cost, highly profitable, reputation, and sustainable.

  91. Matthew Passero

    The focus of this movie is clearly about how certain corporations are willing to do almost anything no matter how unethical or selfish just to make a profit at the expense of others and the environment. It really is sad, but true that some people in this world would rather run a company this way than be honest, take pride in their company, and have some coporate social responsibility. I honestly believe that in today’s world every company needs to have some degree of social responsibility simply because of the fact that anything else is just downright wrong and unethical. If a company can’t make an honest profit without hurting people or the environment, then that company should not be in business. Certainly not every company is like this, and it’s too bad that this documentary didn’t show more of the good companies that are out there as well.

  92. Scott Buckley

    The Corporation is clearly a one-sided documentary that points out the faults of Corporations. Sure, without a doubt some corporations have engaged in activities that reduce the total social surplus, but I think there are plenty of corporations that have added to it. Simply put they have provided millions of Americans with a source of income for well over a century.

    I thought a couple of things lowered the impact of the movie. First of all the length was unnecessarily long. The producers could very well have made their points with half the time. I thought this reduced the effectiveness of their arguments and at times, it seemed as though the movie was preaching, not teaching. Puking propaganda on an audience for 2 and a half hours is not the best way to convince someone.

    Another fact that took credibility away from the movie is that they don’t present any other points of view. Show a corporation that is making a profit and operating up to their ethical standards. Use this corporation as a base for your argument to prove that its possible to make a profit without exploiting people.

    It seems as though people forget the point of a corporation or business. The main goal is to maximize value for shareholders. If you really want to make a point and show Corporate America that you mean business, stop buying their products. Take away the one thing they absolutely need to survive.

  93. The corporation is a long, but interesting film. I’m really shocked by the facts showed in the movies. Especially, for most companies, they seemed to emphasize on their profit. Companies operated businesses by meeting their objectives, even though they may damage the environment or cause irreversible consequences in the future. The bottom line is about competition, market shares, be aggressive, and stockholder value. It stressed that people, especially stockholders, only care about how much money that companies could earn. However, companies in today have realized the importance of environment and their responsibilities of society. I believe companies and management would put more effort on improving connection with communities and societies.

  94. “The Corporation” is a documentary style film that takes an in depth look into not only the history and development of business and corporations but also the psychology and motives that make up the underlying foundations of global corporations.

    Obviously the film portrays business as having the same characteristics as a sociopath, an entity which acts purely in its own interests, is solely focused on profits and shows complete disregard for human safety.

    I find myself disagreeing with most of the statements presented in this film. First there were some specific points and statements that I find myself questioning. One part focused on Goodyear and the laying off of workers. Another part talks of Nike paying unfair wages in factories located in third world countries. The first point seems similar to the GM/Flint, Michigan situation in that the company must be able to make enough money so that it can stay afloat. Regarding Nike and third world countries. I’m certainly not an advocate of unfair working conditions but it seems that some benefit of Nike opening a factory (wages to buy food/water) although small, is better than no benefit at all. The documentary doesn’t mention anything about conditions in these villages before Nike came. These are just two small instances of arguments and logic that seem to be heavily skewed and biased.

    One major point I would like to make is that I think companies have made great strides in environmentalism and social responsibility even in the last 5, 10 or 15 years. Companies are now devoting time and resources to charities, community service, helping undeveloped nations, and finding sources for cleaner fuel. In fact, I think as society becomes more aware of our impact on the environment and our planet, corporations are being forced to be more environmentally friendly. It can actually be a competitive advantage for many companies that use their name and brand image as a main source of revenue.

    In the end I understand that there have been too many unethical practices in corporate world, but I also think that business on average has taken a turn in the right direction.

  95. Like many of the people that have already posted, although I can see the validity in some of the points that are made throughout the movie, such as the breakdown that occurs as corporations continually push to innovate, patent, and brand new products and markets, like most I disagree with many of the basics that the film is trying to get across. Rather then go into this, as I would likely be repeating others at this point, one aspect that I found entertaining was the “spy recruiter” and the marketer who spoke about indirect advertising.

    These two individuals really mark a change from responsibility and ethics falling on this large unknown corporation, to two sets of actions that are in large part organized by one individual. What really stuck out to me was when the “recruiter” stated, this type of activities should be expected and “I don’t feel bad about it in any way.” The commentary quickly switched from the image of a “big bad corporation” that is only driven to make money to an individual driven for the same reasons. Although in large part I believe the message was intended as a reflection on corporations, I took it as evidence that you can not talk about the responsibility of a corporation to act ethically without first focusing on a need for the individuals involved to want to act ethically.

  96. Jiaxi(Zeta)Chen

    I got a big shock when I started to watch this documentary. I mean even I know the truth that corporations trade off a lot of social benefits to make big bucks. But the details of corporation’s evil actions showed in this movie make me feel that the world is awful with a lot of “crime” made by corporations. However, when I watch more, I feel better and start to think it’s not an exact right way to say corporations as psychopaths.
    I have to say yes that with the development of the industry, now corporation might take unethical and illegal actions to human, animal and biosphere. And the documentary points out a lot of companies they are guilty and need to pay criminal fines to be punished. Then what about the bottom line of corporations? That’s survival in the competition!!! It’s like in a biological cycles, only the winners will be survivors. Corporations can’t avoid doing evil actions to the human, animal and biosphere, but the only thing they can do is lessen hurt that are brought out by their evil actions. Unless human beings all go back to ancient times, then maybe there is no evil thing happen in the world that is made by corporations, which is impossible. At the same time, without the corporations, who will provide us with the majority of the products and services we use for every day; without corporations, how can we get job opportunities to support ourselves and our family; and without corporations, the society will go back not go forward to become more developed.
    Meanwhile, when we blame corporations to say they don’t take social responsibility, we need to question ourselves who set down game rules in biological cycle to push corporations take social responsibility—the government!!! I agreed with Naveen and Frank’s viewpoint that the extent to which a corporation can exploit human beings is determined by the government in a given nation. Governments should be responsible to put leashes on corporations if the games rules for corporations do not work well to the normal biological cycle. For example, for industries which produce industrial waste to pollute the water, government should limit the amount of industrial waste corporations does not exceed natural cleansing capacity of water. So that it can minimize water pollution by corporations.
    In conclusion, as a legal person, corporation with constitutional rights do have social responsibilities. But if government doesn’t regulate corporations to take their social responsibility, the government and the citizens for next generation will pay off what corporations did in the past. Then it’s government’s fault to bring out unfeasible aftereffect to our next generations. In other words, in a non-regulate society, every corporation will be criminal.

  97. Michael Warren

    This documentary talks about the ‘evils’ of corporations in America. In the first part of the movie it compares a corporation to a human, as having a personality. However, the movie goes on to say that these corporations tend to have no responsibility. The documentary tried to stress that stockholders only care about making money and not about having any social responsibility. One thing I found interesting was the university students who were being sponsored in order to pay tuition. I would have never of thought that a corporation would go to that measure to get its name out. I feel this movie was way too long to make its point. Three hours of propaganda is way too much. I also feel that this documentary is very dated as corporations have now realized the growing importance of the environment and the need to be socially responsible. Corporations now have programs for community service as well as new technology to help them go green.

  98. Molly McManus

    The Corporation attempts to label all public, modern-day corporations as greedy and power hungry “people” who will not let anything get in their way of a profit, opportunity, and bottom-line. The movie assesses and compares the personality of a corporation to a regular human being. To me, comparing the overall purpose, goals, and objectives of a human to a corporation is like comparing apples to oranges…and even that may be too close. The main objective of all corporations is to increase shareholder value. If this fails, than investors and consumers lose trust and who will want to invest and own shares in companies? If companies do not have this as their major objective, than a huge downward spiral will occur in the economy.

    To play devil’s advocate, if companies put a large amount of their earnings into employee bonuses, employee incentives, community service, donations, and other such things, shareholders and “regular” human beings alike, will be upset at this as well because they cannot get the most out of their pensions and retirement funds or other such investments that they had planned on. The point is that you cannot make everyone happy, someone will always be criticizing you. I feel that labeling all corporations as “clinically-diagnosed psychopaths” is a bit over the edge. I do believe that ethics, corporate social responsibility, and the level of CEO compensation are a few issues that are quite daunting today. I believe that CEO’s take on too much risk, because it seems that even if their plan fall through, they will be kindly asked to leave with a hefty compensation package. Areas like this, I can agree with the fact that greed and power are the only things on their mind, and issues of this nature truly need to be addressed. Overall, while I believe this was a very creative way of addressing the corporate greed, accountability, and corporate social responsibility issues, the basis of comparing entire corporations to psychopaths was a little too much for me and quite disheartening as an MBA student.

  99. Chiao-Yin Chang

    The documentary film”The Corporation” depicts the greedy sides of modern corporation and analysis the sickness of it. It uses the ironic way to explore the essence which is nothing but making profit. Corporation doesn’t have any moral or sympathy. It even could hang itself by rope only when doing this could make fortune.
    The film includes a lot of people such as academics, entrepreneurs, or the social movement leaders to talk about their opinions of corporate. I very admire the way which the director uses to describe these cruel actions with funny way to make me laugh but think about the deeper meaning when I saw it. Even though “The Corporation” critics the modern corporations as madman, the so called corporation still published the film because of that such topic could appeal the attention in order to make profit. So ironic but somehow so real.

  100. William Haller

    Like any other documentary or journalistic endeavor, The Corporation has a heavy bias. The basic premise is that the corporation, if it were an actual human being, would be utterly insane and hated. It’s greed, changing sides and relationships all the time, cut throat competitive attitude, and willing to “kill” other businesses are just some of the pertinent attributes ascribed to the modern day corporation. The basis for the argument comes from the idea that the corporation has certain legal rights and can be protected as an entity by courts and government.

    While the movie has some good points about the lack of social responsibility of corporations, the overall argument has its problems. I don’t believe the corporation should be held to the standards of human beings. Individual decision makers and choices can be scrutinized as terrible and immoral, but the corporation itself is run by the people. If they do things many people deem unacceptable, then that is due to the strategy makers in the company, not the corporation itself. I also feel that many people neglect the services, jobs, and products the corporation provides everyday people. The corporation was born out of the wants and needs of human beings, it was not somehow self conceived and perpetuated. If we want a different type of corporation, become a different kind of consumer and also influence the place you work at.

  101. think the movie was good but I don’t have the same opinion to the main conclusion of the movie a Corporation is a dangerously destructive psychopath without conscience. I agree with Molly who said that you cannot make everyone happy. Corporation’s main purpose is to maximize shareholder value they are very different from non profit organizations. In fact I believe that now a day’s all corporations realize their social responsibility as well and do good for the society. So calling corporations dangerous is not justified because apart from fulfilling their social responsibility they provide employment and indirectly run the economy. Moreover I think its all about presentation. The movie shows what it wants to show, so on that basis the point was clearly conveyed. The movie wants corporations to be serious about the social responsibilities and put people before profits. And I think corporations today are sensitive to the society.

  102. This movie is very bias about the negative image of corporations. The logic in the film completely lacks any repercussions for unethical actions. This is not a representative view of the world as it actually is. In a world where the free markets are allowed to work as they normally do, these things do not happen as often as shown. Most people in third world countries today are better off because of their past. An example is in India. At first, people thought that they were being taken advantage of. Children working for low wages in unsafe work environments. Today India is much better off because of the capitalism that was regarded as cruel in the past. This is a stage in the growth of third world countries and it is too often viewed as a negative thing.

  103. Lauren Spielberg

    The Corporation is an excellent example of how corporations are not socially responsible. Although in recent years, corporations have tried to improve and be better socially responsible, many firms have already caused unchangeable damage. The movie showed corporations in many negative arenas and basically stated that corporations were the reason why cancer has been found in so many people in recent years. Although corporations are seen as being evil and the cause of many problems, it is the people, not the corporation who makes decisions. It is up to the people to run the corporations to be socially responsible, and not just the CEO either. I couldn’t believe the statement that one person made saying that the events of September 11th were good because the price of gold increased. This alone shows that traders and many people have no social responsibility and only care about greed and money. These events became huge tragedies for the American people, especially New Yorkers and the fact that people were happy because they got more money is ridiculous. This just shows that it’s not necessarily the corporation but it is the people who must be socially responsible. Even though corporations are seen as having a personal identity, they aren’t the ones making the decisions, the shareholders and management are. In order for a corporation to be socially responsible, its people have to first be.

  104. Larysa Karasev

    We had a chance to see one more wonderful movie. Moviemakers tried very hard to find facts that would make everyone shocked, they used eye-opening effect and they were quite successful – it touched both my heart and my mind. We all know that all businesses’ purpose is to make money. But there are so many ways to do it! We all know that in the process of doing business entails some unfavorable events like laying off people but no one really understand that these species, called “Corporations” are destroying the only place that we all have to live – our planet. Some of the comments here were – how can we demand the conscience from corporations – they are not alive, but they consists of people who actually realize that their actions have an immerse impact on the place where their kids need to live. We can see from the movie that there are people out there who realized that the former way of making money is not acceptable anymore; the company cannot leave ruins and contaminated mountains after itself. Some scientists now warn that the way we use water is so insufficient that the world will have a water deficit in 2030 – it’s only 22 years from now! I think this movie does a great job – it makes people think. We all are going to work as we need money to live. But we can make a lot of choices in this journey – what company to chose, what environmental and ethical standards to stick to, how to use what we have now. Each of us can contribute to saving the planet and remember – “People, united, will never be defeated!”

  105. The Corporation is a documentary which thoroughly examines the past and now of corporations. It points out the common bad habits of corporations, such as only think about profit and don’t care about others, and then it refers corporations to people, pointing out that these corporations have responsibilities. For example, the responsibility for the environment. Finally, the movie brings up the point of CSR, corporate social responsibility, that all the decisions a corporation make should be responsible for the society and create value for the society not only for the corporation itself.

  106. Kuo-Shen Huang

    I think that the Corporation is one of the very interesting movies I have seen in my life. At beginning, I thought it was just as common as other movie and just want to convey how to execute the company in order to maximum their shareholder profits. After watching this movie, it is totally different from what I originally think. Actually, I learned a lot from this movie. I can’t imagine corporate power can substantially influence the government as well as job markets. That means that corporations have so large power to do “unethical” activities and even ignore the social responsibility especially when these corporations have become larger and larger. This movies definitely let us to think about what responsibility the corporation should have except for maximum their profit earnings.

  107. It is hard to judge if the movie is gives a complete picture of a corporation as a social entity. It is easy to produce a visual or a written message that will represent only one side of the medal completely ignoring the other. People get influenced very easily by the visual information and the movie uses that psychological feature of human nature. Definitely, it’s true that there is a lot of harm that corporations produce for that world. But have the authors of that movie thought about why businesses are driven into being willing to disregard the safety of other people or violating norms of law obedience? One of the biggest driving forces is the law is supply and demand. And the former is created by consumers or, simpler, by people themselves. Those same people that are represented as victims in the movie! Who else but these people compete to buy the cheapest product possible disregarding the amount of carbon footprint left by these products? Who wanted to drive gas guzzling SUVs for decades, thus driving demand up and demanding more and more of such products to be manufactured? These same consumers! Who wants corporations show competing financial results in order to boost value of their retirement investments? These same individual investors!
    I believe that instead of criticizing the implementations of consumers’ demand, authors of the movie should think about influencing consumers behavior, and try to alter it towards conscious and thrifty attitude to what is left of the planet. Corporations, in turn, will adapt quickly to such a change, would it happen, and change their attitudes. Examples are numerous: GM and Ford switching to smaller and energy efficient cars, homebuilders using new generation energy saving materials, Los Angeles businesses cutting practice of giving free plastic bags to customers, etc.

  108. Chin-Hsiang Lin

    Apparently, this movie was talked about the ethical issue which reflects on whether Corporation should generate profit by producing many pollutants, toxics, and carcinogens or not. It is also gave me a thought. What if corporation stop making profit by hurting earth, can still live so well? Can industry grow at rapid pace without using any kind of chemical that might hurt human being? In my opinion, how to make a win-win situation is an initial thinking. There is no doubt that corporation have take a responsibility for society. They should always have gratitude for society and give feed-back to society, such as providing foundation for poor children. In a word, developing technology is a good thing so that people live in a convenient environment. However, if technology is developed based on careless of consequence, the result will lead human to be in an end. This movie is warning people that they should value the globe.

  109. “The Corporation” is an interesting take on the ideals and values of corporations and how they would behave if they were individuals like you or me. The film looks at how corporations behave towards other corporations, how they develop, as well what type of “personality” they have. It even goes as far as to compare the modern corporation with an individual who is a psychopath. This is an extremely unique way of looking at modern big-business, and it does this from a psychological standpoint. The movie does make its case clear; it does so with specific real world examples which show how these qualities truly apply.
    Some of these examples were things I had personally never heard of before, such as the Business Plot which involved overthrowing the president. Some of these examples I had heard of, such as IBM’s role in the Holocaust. Both were excellent in displaying the ruthless, almost insane antics which go on in our country. The film gave me a greater respect for corporations and just how ruthless they can be. If I ever find myself working for one, I will be sure to watch my back.

  110. In this documentary, the film maker explores the dynamics of ‘the corporation’ from its creation, development, identity. I found it interesting that in this film the corporation is characterized as almost an individual having: a personality, motives, rights, psychology, and selfishness. In modern times, people tend to think of a corporation as a body, a mechanism, through which internal collaboration creates external commerce for profit, however after watching this film I got a much different sense. Instead of thinking of a corporation as a collection of individuals, it begins to form its own collective consciousness where as an individual may think an action as immoral or unethical, yet as part of a greater body they allow these actions. Because shareholders are protected from legal action, they push to maximize profit at all costs, but is this Machiavellian strategy always ideal? Or does Corporate Social Responsibility have a place in business? While this film is a bit biased in the way it presents its facts, I did take a lot from this film and it does raise an interesting discussion over the conventional thought of the modern corporation and what exactly is acceptable action for such an entity.

  111. The movie is a documentary ctitiquing the modern day corporation and showing its behaviour towards the society. The corporation is shown as a heartless institution not considering the effect it has on the common people, environmentand exploiting the third world countries, its people and its resources .
    It made me think about my future, about whether i wanted to associated with such a culture or not. However i do feel that the movie is too left sided in its views. The movie definitely provokes your thoughts and makes you think.

  112. Corporate social responsibility is a concept whereby organizations consider the interests of society by taking responsibility for the impact of their activities on customers, suppliers, employees, shareholders, and communities, as well as the environment.
    For those corporations, who care only about their own benefit, and expand on others’ are called unethical. And, in order to meet people’s expectation, corporations should integrate responsibilities into day-to-day business, engaging all stakeholders and including strategies to support individual managers to make socially responsible decisions, conform to ethical behavior.

  113. George DeVardo

    The Corporation is a biased look at how companies have been and are run in the world today. It bases its ideology in the idea that corporations are only out for profit and don’t think about the social welfare of the area surrounding it or society in general. The documentary then goes as far as to compare a corporation to a human being and the results are alarming because if a corporation was a person it would be breaking laws and would create an insane person. But corporations cannot be compared in this respect because there are so many different factors that go into the decision process of a firm than an individual.

    The corporation is responsible for many more things and people so this comparison is extreme at best and holds little merit.

  114. The corporation is a 2 and half hour long movie that bashes corporations from every angle. This movie feels a lot to me like “roger and me” and it is no surprise as one of the recurring characters in the corporation and the closing speech belongs to that of Michael Moore. Like any story, there are two sides and this movie takes the side of the little guy and attempts to make you feel there pain and be against the corporations as they are. I have not experienced the tragedies that the victims of the corporations discussed in this movie have gone through such as the slave labor and the pesticides, but I have reaped the benefits of them such as quality products that make my life easier and more enjoyable. As selfish as that may be, it would be worse for me to take sides without hearing both points of view, and the I certainly don’t feel that I received both points on the matter in this movie.

  115. I honestly attempted to keep and open mind while watching this documentary, but I must say that doing so became increasingly difficult as the film progressed. It was really quite clear for the very start of the movie that the work was one-sided and produced by individuals who have an axe to grind. As the film progressed, I came to view the content not only as biased, but increasingly as blatantly unfair. The creators may as well erase that halo from above the head of the person representing corporate America on the cover of the DVD, as little if anything positive about corporations is presented in the movie. The identities of the many individuals interviewed during the film reflect the communistic vibe that thoroughly penetrated the work. I personally found myself shouting at my television at many moments during the film as I found the misrepresentations communicated therein to be quite infuriating.
    As far as content is concerned, the documentary makes several fatal errors in assessing the nature of the modern day corporation. It is very true that companies are regarded as separate, individual persons under United States law, and this classification is really markedly superior to other possible configurations, but at the same time one must not take this identity so literally so as to begin to regard companies as giant monsters. At the end of the day, one must remember that companies are intimately tied to those actual persons who administer them, and a corporation’s actions are not really all that divorced from the dealings of those biotic individuals who are in charge. Ultimately, the management of a firm makes decisions that benefit the company in line with the laws of macroeconomics, and if some institution is to be held accountable for the social failings of modern corporations, that organization ought to be the governmental body that inadequately supervises the system in which companies operate (of course this supposes that one institution alone ought to be held accountable, and that a systemic problem exists, neither of which I view to be the case). Certifying corporations as psychopaths is not only myopic, but really it is meaningless overall. At the end of the day, this documentary is really just a politically motivated grab for attention that fails to make any lasting impression upon anyone who is educated in the workings of actual modern corporations. Corporate social responsibility and ethics are crucial issues that are now more important than ever, but unfortunately very few if any of the arguments presented in this film validly fall under this umbrella.

  116. Chang, Ting-Chia

    This documentary “The Corporation” is well stressed on the ideal and value of the modern companies which pursuit only profit as ultimately goal. The film maker adopted an extremely aspect to compare and contrast the personality of firms and human beings. The movie reflects the real world business and it is so truly description under this documentary. On the standing point of ethics, there is no doubt that the corporation should take their own responsibility for society. As a decision maker of corporation, you should measure it carefully between profit and ethics to create a win-win situation. In my opinion, it is possible to pursuit profit and to create social welfare at the same way. A company does a role model and dedicates itself for social welfare. In the long term, this company could get a better goodwill and reputation to gain abnormal profit in each aspect.

  117. Chris Bellinzoni

    I found the corporate balancing act between fiscal and social responsibility discussed in this movie to be very complex, more so than this documentary would lead you to be. If you take the movie’s message at face value then you’d come to the conclusion that companies must always be socially responsible and hold that responsibility in the highest regard. The sad truth of the world is that this sort of behavior is just not possible. In order for the corporate framework to succeed the first responsibility of a company has to be the creation of value for its shareholders. I think the only realistic way to look at corporate social responsibility is that in respect to a strong reputation and good working relationship with governments and people it is an important task. The only way a company is going to make social responsibility one of its key issues is if doing so creates more value for the firm. Companies will not, and by design cannot, implement social responsibility activities simply because they may be the right thing to do.

  118. Daniel Pokidaylo

    The Corporation dwelled on the horrors of corporations, and how unjust they are in society. The documentary compares a corporation to a psychopath, saying it does not care about others at all. The movie was similar to roger and me, particularly in trying to destroy the image of large corporations. As I also mentioned in my Roger and Me blog, corporations should have a corporate social responsibility in their community because most of the employees are from the area. Employees work diligently for the corporation, so the corporation should give back to the community. However, corporations are constantly under pressure (especially in todays society) to please shareholders in order to keep their stock prices high.
    Clearly corporations rather not do activities and be socially responsible if they do not recieve a positive NPV investment in return, however, corporations spend millions on paying for lavish hotel rooms to recruit college students, but they can’t afford to donate a few thousand to better the community? That makes no sense to me.

  119. I like the analogy used at the beginning of the movie that compares the media debate about the basic operating principles of the corporate world being reduced to a game of follow the leader. It’s not atypical at all to see that once one person sees another get away with something that they’ll want to do the same. Even in our own classroom this past week this could’ve been observed. Specifically, once somebody in our class heard of the point spread that was allowed in another class then they suggested it and almost everybody in the class fought for a reduced point spread for the simulation. I’d be willing to bet that if nobody ever heard of that taking place in the earlier class that nobody would’ve suggested it in ours, but once they realized the one class could have the spread reduction we all wanted it (granted I know this isn’t illegal, just discussing how prevalent the principle is). I agree that many practices discussed in the movie need to be stopped. Corporations owe it to society to prevent or at minimum not create “externalities.” In addition I feel that practices, particularly exploitation of workers is wrong. However, you can’t just blame the corporations, after all how many of us wear or use the products that are made through exploitation??? I think I also have very ambivalent feelings toward exploitation. I don’t agree with the extremely low minimum wages paid, or a company benefiting at the expense of others, but these minimum wages do keep many people in third world countries from starving so isn’t something better than nothing? I’m not intentionally trying to be ignorant, but what do you suggest if nobody else is doing anything to help feed these people? I don’t think it’s really fair to be accusing corporations as being evil for exploitation of workers when there’s nobody else solving the problem to any greater extent. Another externality of and produced by corporations are damaging chemicals. These chemicals are harmful to our environment and the people in them. This is completely unacceptable and corporations should be strictly regulated to prevent such pollution. I’ve seen first-hand because of local communities in Binghamton I’ve grown up in (Hillcrest, Endicott) how the negative effects of corporations have destroyed families.

  120. The documentary `The Corporation’ directed by Michael Moore once again depicts a one sided view which demeans the existence of corporations. The movie starts with taking a look at corporations as `artificial creations’ which would be true if there was no `consumer need’ in the market and if these products were created with `no demand’ to forecast. In this case, then corporations would not have any bottom line approach. Bottom line not only means maximum penetration for profit maximization which in the documentary is cruel. But in reality it also states that bottom line evolves from the creation of products satisfying the needs and demands in the market. And hence to gauge the acceptance and provide its usage to as many as possible, corporations have goals and bottom lines.

    I would say there are few apples which create disasters, but there are many good companies around who have proved to have created a better living. First of all corporations not only create jobs but they in a way create a system for people to enjoy the benefits of their new created products. If one accuses that company puts bottom-line ahead of everything, then how do we justify the goodness that consumers enjoy with the luxuries created by companies around which are disposable at a certain price. Isn’t the world a much better place to live than what it was decades ago?

    And if you say corporations are psychopaths means in a way you are doubting the existing people who are creating these products and the consumers in a way too who are consuming it in return. Now I have been reading the book Swoosh which gives you background information of the creation of Nike. When Phil Knight went about creating Nike as a brand in US, he saw the need in this segment, and had the most ardent people joining this team. They were more like family and trusted each other’s decisions; also they were passionate and creative in their approach. When he set up plants in third world country was because of cheap labor but not because he wanted to exploit it any further. As much as Knight wanted the plants in third world countries there was equal eagerness and response from the third world for this proposal. And if one accuses of the poor working conditions, are we saying that only the global giants create this kind of an environment or is in rooted in the system irrespective of global or local organizations. So when Moore boasts about the fact that Knight did not even visit Indonesia where Nike factory is situated, to me there is some backhand responsible team member taking care of this. I would not take Moore’s assumptions about Knight to any extreme here unless I see the other side completely.

    Another instant is when he claims that marketing is a notion of manipulating kids, I wouldn’t agree to least out here. Technology is growing and there is so much innovation happening around that can be used creatively to promote brands. After all isn’t the real existence of humanization to step up from its latest innovation and develop further.

    Now as far as Corporate Social Responsibility goes, if companies are exploiting the third world with taking advantage of their cheap labor and in turn making them work in catastrophic environments, etc. Is it the corporation’s job to really uplift a community? Where are the government organization, NGO’s etc. Third world problems are much larger than this and it has to be tackled at the grass route. Going painstakingly behind corporations for all the harm that they are doing, isn’t going to really justify the situation. I could have agreed to Moore to a certain extent, only if he had presented both sides of the coins.

  121. The Corporation is a documentary film that touches upon the issue of corporate social responsibilities. The topic has been talked more and more in the business world today as it directly links to a company’s reputation and influences people within a certain community. The film starts off by defining what a corporation is and how it evolves to become a powerful institution. Different segments of the film address specific themes such as child labor employment in developing countries, injecting product imagines to minors from advertising companies, and forcing unethical employee wrongdoings from corporate managers. The goal for any corporation is of course to make money and generate profit, and yet sometimes we have to question if the action taken for yielding that profit is ethical or legitimate. The film mentions tons of corporations that were found guilty for a variety of reasons, and some of them have already run out of business. There should be a balance between money seeking and the sense of social responsibilities for every company in the industry. Prioritizing the task of revenue benefit ought to be built on the foundation of business ethics all the time. Comparing the potential cost of going out of business and involving in a lawsuit with giving up a certain project or conduction to fit legal standards and ethical responsibilities, the latter is much less expensive and so more desired. The film overall sends a clear message that every corporation should keep strong social responsibilities when carrying out business activities to the benefit of their shareholders, as their actions will have a serious consequence to other people and the society as well.

  122. Niamh Delaney

    The Corporation is a documentary style film about the evil nature of Corporate America, and the repercussions of their actions in various parts of the world. While, I believe that decisions that large conglomerates make are not always ethically sound, the director of this film really took his negative opinion to the extreme. One of the issues he talked about which struck a cord with me was child labor. Let’s face it, child labor is not pretty. The idea of a kid slaving away in a sweatshop, with atrocious work conditions for 10 cents a day, when they should be in school and playing makes me ill. Unfortunately this issue is a double edged sword. These children are living in third world countries and need to work to be able to provide basic necessities for themselves and their families. In some instances they are even the primary breadwinners. Without these corporations, these children would not have jobs and would starve to death. That said, companies need to take some social responsibility and treat their workers better. An American Corporation, which outsources its operations to an underdeveloped nation can still produce goods at a lower cost while treating these children with some dignity. These workers need to be paid a livable wage- in their country such a salary is a paltry sum compared to the American cost of living. They should not be treated as machines and should be given fair working conditions and breaks. While we cannot correct child labor over night and save the world from poverty. Corporations taking small steps toward responsibility would be a great help.

  123. The Corporation is about the business world and corporate responsibility. The movie examines the fact that many business act out of greed and have little regard of anything or anyone standing in their way. I have definitely how businesses can hurt people and the environment. IBM putting toxic and harmful materials into the environment has caused significant health problems for local residents. Enron hurt its stockholders and pension holders when it participated in “creative accounting”. The recent financial collapse is another example of failed corporate responsibility. Corporations should have enough ethics and responsibility to make correct decisions even if they hurt the company’s bottom line. While this movie only showed one side of the corporate responsibility coin, it is valuable to watch to learn more about the decisions companies make.

  124. This is quite different from the ones we watched before, although it is not comedy, it does attract people by providing us with broad as well as specific view of corporation. Corporation is not a person who can think, but it functions by many persons. It is a place to work but it also has its emotions and personalized way of doing things. It could be made better by the way which it chooses to reach a certain goal. I also have the feeling that the world is flat when I watch this movie. At least people think from global perspective rather than one aspect only. Although some issue shown in a way which I do not really agree with and some suggestions I deem as useless, it did provide me with some other ways of thinking. The documentary also reflect the difference between large corporations and everage companies. The global business requires for global perspective and critical thinking. Also, even if business has good planing in many aspects, it still could lose if one aspect is very weak.

  125. Wen Jiun Tsai

    In this documentary ” The Corporation”, most time what we are given is the dark side of the corporations. In order to seek the profits for corporation, they become callous unconcern for the feelings of others. However, what inspires me more is the words from the CEO of Interface. He addressed a simple principle, ” Doing no Harm” for corporations to pursue while they are seeking profits either for their own or the public good. While corporations can take their social responsibilities, what can be added to solidify is the governments’ control. The society still needs the power of the government to set up laws or rules for corporation to follow along with the self-awareness of the corporation.

    Fortunately we have much more integral groups and people around the world and thanks to their integrity, concerns for people and braveness against the notorious corporations, the corporations cannot deprive anythings they want from the earth and the people. For example, with the efforts of Arcada, the water privatization comes true. And they even correspondingly catalyze the success of the water privatization elsewhere.

    Definitely the corporations have the social responsibilities to be giving back the society while they get something from it. What drives corporation to take those responsibilities is also from the power and integrity of government and people.

  126. Michael Buxbaum

    The Corporation offers a vey insightful view into the corporation through impressive facts and interviews. This documentary compares corporations to a psychopath in the pursuit of profit and power. It is stressed that corporations are evil, only caring about profit and power, because this is essentially what the shareholders desire. Through its one-sided perspective, this film effectively portrays the negative aspects of corporations such as through sweatshops and environmental pollution. While it is true, that corporations always aim to maximize profit, this should not be viewed as wrong. The purpose of business is to make money, and everything else realistically is secondary. Also, corporations have definitely been working to be more socially aware and responsible in recent years. Another aspect of the movie in which I would like to offer a slightly different perspective is the idea that corporations are humans. I disagree in that corporations are only as good as the people who run them and to blame a corporation for wrongdoings is really to blame the actual people making the decisions for the firm.

  127. I’m late, but I still want to comment.

    Binghamton University professor and evolutionist David Sloan Wilson uses bricks as a metaphor for research. A single brick on its own doesn’t do much. But as bricks are added, a foundation is laid and then builders can form a solid structure working together. Many bricks put together make something useful. With evolution, thousands of points of research have formed evolutionary theory, changing the way humans view the world. Its foundation has been built on solid bricks. Any argument depends on putting bricks together in a way that leads to a strong finished product. Some of the bricks presented in The Corporation seem shaky.

    “We are in the midst of a major cancer epidemic,” said a professor from the University of Illinois. First, I was skeptical of this because I know the average life expectancy of humans everywhere has been increasing steadily for the last century. Worldwide, life expectancy has doubled during the same era corporations have come to rule the roost. In America, we’ve added a year just in the 2000s. So how major is the cancer epidemic if life expectancy keeps rising? Also, there has been a steady decrease in deaths from cancer in the US since the early 1990s. This is due to better prevention, detection, and treatement techniques and a lower smoking rate. Still, this doesn’t mean that more or fewer people are getting cancer now; there actually has been an increase in cancer incidence in the past twenty years, although small. However, because more people are living longer lives compared to one hundred years ago, they have more of a chance to get cancer. So: I don’t know how much stock I put in this cancer-corporations connection.

    The film made mention of Goodyear laying off 20,000 employees over some time period when the man they were interviewing had an impact. If they had not laid off those 20,000, the whole company could have gone down. Plus, they likely did some hiring in that period, too. This was an attempt to trivialize the CEO’s battle with the decisions he makes, and I don’t think it worked well for what the documentary was trying to capture.

    “Corporations of the future do not produce products, they produce brand meaning,” said Naomi Klein. I hardly understand what this means. Is she talking about marketing firms? Aren’t firms already tying some sort of brand meaning to their products? How can they not even produce products? This quote doesn’t help the story line.

    “Companies will own the genes that make up the evolution of our species,” said ______, in reference to mapping the human genome and identifying roots of genetic problems. Good. It seems they won’t own our actual genes, but they’ll own a patent on knowledge related to genes. This is knowledge that wouldn’t exist without the massive effort of research and capital investment undertaken by in many cases corporations, among other groups like universities and governments.

    Wages are an issue worthy of critique, but the film didn’t bother with the other side at all. Competition for labor has increased the standard of living in many places. What happens when a corporation does close down their factory and moves out of a developing country? That’s not a pretty picture. Plus, every country has gone through a period of sweatshop labor – only now, it is taking less time for countries to get out of that stage. The US had a few generations of sweatshop labor; northern Europe had about one generation; then look how quickly Asian economies developed in the 1960s and 1970s.

    Michael Moore’s comment about Lockheed Martin being the primary employer in Littleton, Colorado was another quote used in the film that failed to deliver much substance. School shootings declined in the late 1990s – they were just more spectacular and the media starting paying more attention – and the murder rate declined in the 1990s. Does Moore believe being near the development of WMDs makes children violent? Violence existed before corporations, check out research on murder rates in Medieval through 1800s Europe.

    The best point the film made was on corporations obeying the law only when it is cost effective.

    Now I’m done.

  128. Shih-Ching Wang

    The purpose of a corporation establishing is to make the largest profit to satisfy shareholders. In the beginning, corporations indeed only focus on maximizing their benefit. However, in the decade, people, including the shareholders, are concerned about not only the benefit, but also the corporate reputation relative to social responsibility. Corporations are “humans” in law, which represents they are like natural people and have many rights and are protected by laws, so corporations should also do their responsibility in the society. More and more firms are concerned about the environment, like the body shop, or donate to the non-profit organization periodically. I think this is really good news to the whole society, because corporations are more powerful to promote positive actions than individuals. In addition, corporations earn profits from the public, so they should contribute their benefits back to the public. Nevertheless, corporations still have to satisfy their shareholders, so they can’t only pay attention to their social responsibility, but harm their profits. Thus, it is a big issue for corporation how to get the balance between making profit and doing social responsibility.

  129. In the movie The Corporation, we find a very anti corporation viewpoint. While I disagreed with the way the movie presented its arguments, I believe corporate social responsibility is a very important subject. This planet is the only planet we have and decisions we make can affect the planet in a negative way. For example, when a corporation dumps toxic chemicals into a river, the whole community is negatively impacted. Corporation top management is paid outrageous salaries for one reason they are the ones making the big decisions. Why can’t these people be held accountable for their actions? The answer is that they get to hide behind a company name and an army of corporate lawyers.

    I believe the answer starts with setting an even playing field. We cannot expect companies to just start being environmentally friendly. Companies who try to follow the ‘boy scout’ path (reference to the movie Clear and Present Danger) will always lose out to the companies who are ‘ethically challenged’. What we need to do is level the playing field and that is where Government needs to get involved. The problem here is that with strict Government regulation people will cry “FREE MARKET!” That is why I believe the best solution to this is to have a pollution credit system, where companies buy and sell pollution credits on the open market. This will give a great incentive for companies to be more environmentally friendly because they stand to make money and not spend money on buying pollution credits.

    Now the problem with this system is that companies will try to move operations in other countries. That is why we would need to enforce pollution credits to imports into the country. If that company does not want to disclose their pollution output, they can face harsh tariffs, which will nullify gains from moving operations.

  130. The Corporation is a documentary about corporations as legal entities (in fact, “persons”) that are independent of the actual people who own, manage, or work for them. The overarching theme of the documentary is that if corporations are to be viewed as persons, their actions – for the most part – are socially irresponsible, unethical, and often outright illegal. The producers constantly correlate every one of corporations’ irresponsible actions to the characteristics of a psychopath as defined by psychiatric professionals, concluding that if corporations are legal persons, they are psychopathic legal persons.
    I feel that this conclusion is meant for us – as a society – to view, treat, or even penalize corporations as we would any real psychopath. However, this is rarely the attitude we possess towards corporations. Instead, we rarely question their wrongdoings at the necessary level, we continue to fund them through paying for their services and products, and most significantly, we can’t even bother to ask our governments to hold corporations up the to appropriate amount of accountability and social responsibility that we would prefer to have.
    In the end, if we are to become more conscious and collectively decide to preserve our environment, we have to do it through our governments and bring more regulation on how corporations utilize the natural resources available to us on earth. This is a consciousness that we all have to come to embrace. Although regulation is generally regarded as being more on the left of the political spectrum – the issue of adopting sustainable regulations must be an apolitical matter. As with the tradable rights on how much pollution companies can produce, free-market forces can be utilized to regulate hazardous emissions among corporations – making these companies pay for their damage to the environment and forcing them to reconsider their profitability models as these new kinds of costs become applicable to their production lines.

  131. Ruoyi (Renee) Guan

    The Corporation is one of the most successful documentaries. It is provoking, stylish, and informative. This film opens its audience’s minds by illustrating the problems of a corporation and some possible dangerously destructive behaviors a corporation might take to optimize its profit.With various case studies showed in the film, such as the cases related to IBM/Nazi, the film provide us with a clear image of how the real corporate world looks like. Although the existence of corporations can be a big problem to our modern economic world, at the end we can still find out that there are people who, with courage, intelligence, and determination, can prevent the thread of the future damage that might be caused by corporations.

  132. Alexandra Roseman

    The Corporation was such an interesting movie. The film made a very interesting comparison between the rights of a corporation and the rights of an individual, suggesting that a corporation shares many of the same legal rights as an individual. I hadn’t made this comparison prior to watching the film and this idea made me think more about the ethical responsibilities that a corporation may have. Being a good corporation is similar to being a good person. One feels better after dealing with a corporation with good values that are known to the public rather than bad ones (i.e. Whole Foods vs. Wal Mart), similar to how one feels better having dinner with a good person rather than a bad on (i.e. a philanthropist vs. a thief). The film concentrated on what American “Big Business” companies would be like if they were people. I found the linearity that was drawn between the behavior patterns of “Big Business” and that of a psychopath to be serious and true. Corporations are presented as predatory forces, lacking a conscience, and overlooking their own destruction to make profit. The film skeptically suggested that like a psychopathic person who takes medicine, corporations too maybe able to be cured. I think that the progressiveness of capitalism prevents corporations from being “cured.” Corporations are following the only path that the capitalist political economy has set up for them.

  133. Mitchell Ostrow

    The Corporation illustrates several problems concerning corporations. The movie makes a clear point that corporations main motives are to make a profit with complete disregard for what may be ethical or not. For example, some corporations such as Monsanto, produced a growth hormone for cows, and omitted from their reports that it did not comply with safety standards and could potentially cause cancer. The film questions many of these ethical type situations, some more severe than others.

    I agree that many corporations neglect many ethical issues. A corporation is out to make a profit, and as long as it does so abiding by all laws, they are really doing nothing illegal. But does this mean that what they do is acceptable? In many cases most people would agree that it is not acceptable. For example, IBM produced systems for the Nazi’s in Germany during the Holocaust. IBM denies that they knew what the systems and computers were for, but there is substantial evidence that they did know. In a case of this extreme, I feel that corporation is at fault. But in other issues, such as advertising to children, I feel that while some of their methods may not be desirable, it is acceptable behavior.

  134. Joseph Micale

    “The Corporation” does a very good job of showing how corporations care only about the bottom line and care little for social corporate responsibility. After finishing the movie I researched the topic more and found that most corporations do not keep a balance between meeting the economic responsibility of meeting shareholders, the legal responsibility of complying with countries’ laws, the ethical responsibility to abide by society’s norms, and the philanthropic responsibility to give to society. Therefore, I believe that most corporations don’t try to have corporate social responsibility. Most companies I feel compare the tradeoff of being socially responsible with the drop in the bottom line and who can truly blame them if the opportunity cost of being socially responsible is too great, especially when their competitors aren’t choosing to be responsible. The only way that I feel companies like Monsanto, that blatantly lied about their not meeting safety regulations, Nike, who pays their workers 8 cents per shoe made, and DuPont, whose fungicides caused birth defects and cancers, would choose not to do what they have been doing is if they didn’t have to or they knew that their competitors would have to so they wouldn’t fall behind. Basically, after watching “The Corporation” I feel that if we want corporations to be corporate socially responsible than we have to force them to be.

  135. Though “The Corporation” really only highlights the negative sides of a corporation, one can not ignore the very real hardships that these corporations produce. The Corporation is described as a type of psychopath person. However, I consider it to be more like a robot. It has one goal in mind that is programmed to follow: to make a profit for its’ shareholders. Feelings, emotions, and outlying consequences are not programmed into this robot. It simply knows that in order to survive it must make “necessary” decisions. The robot does not feel guilt for outsourcing manufacturing to China, nor does it feel remorse for poisoning peoples’ water supply.
    What really struck me in this documentary was the very real and stark differentiation between the people running the corporation and the corporation itself. People are vilified because of the decisions they make, but more often than not ( excluding outlier situations such as Enron), they are merely playing within a already built system. For example, the film interviews the former CEO of Shell who seemed like a great person, however he was “forced” to do some unethical practices in order to not only keep his own job, but to also keep Shell profitable. So are the people evil, or is the system evil?
    Corporations only have an social and ethical responsibility their communities if it makes sense for their bottom line. This is a sad but true fact. If it makes more financial sense for DuPont to dump chemicals in a river, then it will do so. As a result, I believe that it is the people, aka the government, who have to make it their responsibility to force the corporations to take responsibility. As mentioned in the film, permits for pollution and huge fines must be given for polluting and/or other unethical practices. However, this only works if it is on a global scale.

  136. The Corporation is a documentary about corporate law. It’s pretty shocking movie. It shows me the corporations are really trying everything in order to increase their profit. In the corporate world, the good people have to do the bad or unethical things to achieve their goals. For example, Mark Barry disguises himself as a headhunter to extract information for his corporate clients from rivals, he says he would never do things so deceitfully in his private life. People in corporate world try to separate their private lives from corporate lives. They know they shouldn’t behave unethically, but it’s the only way for them to survive in the corporate world.

  137. The corporation was the documentary movie wrote by Joel Bakan, and directed by Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott. This movie gave me more deep thought about the business world and the corporations. It made me think more about the social responsibility of the corporation. People knew the reasons for establishing corporation because they wanted to make profit through this kind of organization. Therefore, when there was conflict between the social responsibility and the interest of the corporation. The corporation always disregarded the social responsibility. One picture from the movie which really shocked me was the white foam flowed on the river because the paper mill sent some staff into the river during the night. It made people even can’t open their eyes. Another picture was the air pollution in the Southern part of Peru by a copper factory. When the local people walked on the street, they had to wear the mask. One young boy even needed some kind of instrument to help him to breath. These pictures made me felt sad. I just wonder is the money more important than the other people’s life? Before I thought the world famous corporation might did good at this part. However, I heard many familiar names also got criminal fines by the environmental violations. I think established a whole and systematic law system to protect our environment is a very important way to fix this problem. However, I think the coporation should kewn and act a more important role on protecting our environment by this social responsbility.

  138. Caryn Filonuk

    The documentary “The Corporation” shows the transformation of the corporate world and companies since the inception of corporations in the 1880s. The film was directed by Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott and produced by Mark Abbott, as well. The movie examines the different aspects of corporations including their legal obligations. The documentary talks about the “corporate agenda”. One of the interviewees said that he thinks the word corporation is associated with evil and trying to take over the world. He prefers to say business and even business community. The word corporation is looked at as being a destructive entity around the world. The film also showed how workers were being exploited in other countries and how people were being paid just enough money to buy food and sometimes clothing for their families. The strikes and such that workers in Latin American and South American countries started in order to get better working conditions, just shows the impact of corporations of the lives of workers in some of the outsourced countries. Another interesting fact from the documentary is the way in which corporations can manipulate what the people know about certain products. The incident at the news station and what the reporters were not willing to say about the drug BGH, shows that the media and that corporation has greatly influenced society. The more that people like Jane at the news station are told that they are wrong for trying to only express the truth through the news, the more corrupt the world will get and the more people will see corporations as evil entities.

  139. Abraham Mizrahi

    The Corporation does a good job at highlighting some of the more negative aspects of corporations. Under the law a corporation is a legal person, but in the end of the day it can somehow escape the responsibilities that would normally be required by actual human beings. Instead, corporations can exist with the single goal of enhancing shareholder wealth and in the process they may produce harmful externalities. The externalities include things such as polluting the environment, child labor, and many other things that any sane person can’t really deny as being bad for humanity as a whole.
    However, like many documentaries, The Corporation doesn’t really offer a sound and cohesive solution. It merely mentions a many times that privatization is evil, and that corporations should give back what they have taken from the people. It presents the scenario of the people of Bolivia successfully regaining control of the water supply as its success story. In my opinion, handing what private companies have taken back to the people would yield no better result down the line. These things work in smaller, more confined instances, and they are used to bring out the idealist in all of us. However, on a grand scale I firmly believe that many things in life are cyclical. The corporation was created out of the world’s need for an entity of its kind. If everything were handed back the people there would be chaos. From the chaos, eventually, the need for an entity like a corporation will arise once again. It might be slightly altered and a few of the kinks might be fixed, but after a matter of time it too will once again exert its power and we will all be right back where we started.

  140. Aaron Butler

    The film The Corporation was an interesting piece on the evils of business. It was a very persuasive and discuss the responsibility of corporate citizenship. The most interesting theme is the assessment as a corp being considered a person and in the same right having the same rights such as the 14th amendment.

  141. Melissa Mandras

    The Corporation is a documentary that after watching it, I believe is very important for business students to watch before graduating and entering the workforce. I believe the documentary did a good job in exposing many wrongdoings of corporations. Many may argue that the documentary was one sided and only pointed out negative aspects of corporations, but every thing that was reported was true. As cynical as it is, I also believe many positive actions of corporations occur only to help their reputation, thus increasing their bottom line.
    One argument that I believed was interesting from The Corporation was the fact that the documentary defined a corporation as ” an artificial legal structure”. This, I believe is extremely important to keep in mind. It may be argued that the way the corporation is today is what drives people to be viewed as unethical or “evil”, but in fact I think it is the opposite. I believe that individuals that run these corporations are what drive corporations to be viewed as money hungry and evil. The Goodyear CEO stated that as a CEO he really cannot do what he wants to do. This to me, is an easy way out. Yes, I think it is true that not every bad aspect of a corporation should be blamed on one person, the CEO, but at the same time he does have a say in certain decisions and it is the title that he worked for. In the same section as the Goodyear CEO, the documentary focused on the fact that these people are good people. I am not really sure what this was supposed to portray. Im sure many people who knew Bernie Madoff would say he was a “nice guy”. This is the one problem I had with the documentary. The directors and people involved with the documentary seemed to portray the corporation as evil, but at the same time was trying to personify it. The corporation cannot be personified in my opinion, but the people who run the corporation , whether they preform accepted or unaccepted practices are what drive the corporations.
    It is interesting to see this documentary at a time that we are involved in today. Corporations are perceived as unacceptable to some because all their actions are to improve their bottom line, but as times show today, this practice may have caught up with a large amount of corporations.

  142. Lucy Gonzales

    “The Corporation” by Mark Achbar, Jennifer Abbot, and Joel Bakan goes beyond what any other documentary exposes- It is a wake-up call to the human race in general. While many of the problems exposed are already common knowledge to many business students- they aren’t to the average American. Though, not usually a fan of many issues “exposed” by Michael Moore (or anything he is involved in, for that matter) this was one film where I agreed with several of his points.
    One of the things that stood out to me during the movie was the extent to which we have taken Capitalism- specifically speaking of the Bolivia incident with the rain water. Not necessarily stating I’m completely against capitalism by any means, but I am against the extent and extremism part of it. In addition, I comprehend all of the negativism that come about with corporations and the various concerns the movie pointed out- however, I feel that as a society we keep looking for scapegoats for the problems we have all individually created. All of the corruption, unethical practices, and immoralities performed by corporations are only a product of those who run it- the mere fact that a corporation is its own “entity” is what allows individuals to get away with it. If one were to view this in a cold hearted way, in the end 99% of the earth’s population’s goal is wealth; wealth is only obtained through money. This is what corporations have done; their only goal is money at any cost- no surprise there.
    This isn’t a “corporation” issue, this is a people issue. We run these corporations, we work in these corporations, we consume from these corporations and in the end we are only hurting ourselves. The movie does a great job of pointing out all the problems occurring, yet it gives no solution. I can’t say the movie is biased because there is no other side to “side with” (besides the side that states “I don’t care about anyone and all I want is money even if it kills me in the end.”). The reason the documentary mentions few solutions (such as privatizing is evil and we should boycott corporations) could be due to the fact that at this point there really is no solution. We have done enough harm, and it’s a sad and “psychopathic” cycle. I found it extremely ironic that at the end of the movie Michael Moore goes on to point out how he too is making money out of all these “huge” corporations and then states, “Ultimately we have to, as individuals, accept responsibility for our collective action and the larger harm that it causes in our world.” Ironic as it may be it goes on to show how true it is that all of the problems caused by Corporations have only occurred due to our own personal actions.

  143. The documentary The Corporation is based heavily on the negative aspects that surround corporations. A corporation is defined in the documentary as a group of individuals working together as a unit to achieve a common goal, to maximize production and make a large sum of money for the corporations share holders. And in many many circumstances corporations will do whatever it takes to cut costs to maximize profits even if its not ethical. As seen in the movie this can inclue layoffs, union busting, factory fires and worst of all children working in sweatshops. One man in The Corporation described Corporations as evil and their agenda to be as though they are taking over the world which again portrays Corporations and large companies in a negative light. In many instances it was rightfully so to portray some corporations negatively and I thought it was particularly interesting to see the breakdown of Nike’s sweatshops and how much the employees got paid down to the penny compared to the two hundred dollar jackets they hand stitched in about 10 minutes. We see in the film a kathy lee Gifford product being sold at walmart and on the tag it reads “a portion of the money made on this product will go to under privalidged children” which is ironic because it is under privalidged kids making that product in the first place.
    Not only do corporations take action that will negatively harm their workers but also take actions that will harm their health or the populations. I thought it was interesting to find out that despite a company knowing something that they are doing can be very harmful to our environment and society they will try to cover it up instead of fixing the problem. Pollution, toxic wastes , synthetic chemicals are all risks that these corporations know about and try to trivialize.
    In conclusion, very informative and interesting documentary.

  144. Stephanie Crandall

    The documentary “The Corporation” may be one sided, but it is full of truth, and truths that need to be told. I think that it is essential that business students watch this documentary. Interestingly, I recall watching “The Corporation” in my freshman year at another school. Watching it again 4 years later after all of the business classes I have taken, the knowledge I have obtained, and the tremendous changes in the economy since then, the video has even more meaning. The first portion of the film describes who the “corporation” would be if it were a person; a psychopath. While the extent to which a particular corporation fits this mold as a “psychopath” may be different from one company to the next, the point is that they all are taking part in unfavorable behaviors at some point, after all, we all know they have that bottom line to live up to. They go on to list corporation after corporation who have been a part of major law suits for such behaviors. Another interesting point in the documentary was the idea of the “mindless” consumer. This is what these corporations have created but more importantly that we ourselves have created. Corporations have been looking for any way possible to create some sort of need and to convince people that it is in fact a need and we all buy into it. Perhaps we as consumers need to reevaluate what we consider to be a “need” and there is probably no better time to do this than now as we see firsthand the economic turmoil happening around us.

  145. This movie, The Corporation (2003), was directed by Mark Achbar and wrote by Joel Bakan, documentary film about how did the corporation originated and how have the corporation been affected to society and world. As a documentary film, the director, of course, tries to find the worst corporations’ harmful problems which are caused by greedy owners to the public which are not really realize about side effects from profit motivated companies which are artificially created associations. The problems become more harmful to the pubic with externality- In economics, an externality of an economic transaction is an impact on a party that is not directly involved in the transaction. Mark Achbar mentions ethical problems for example environmental pollution problems, cows injected antibiotics, copy of DNA and lobar abuses with reckless disregarded for the safety of others. As a business student and public, I strongly agree with his points to realize all of possible problems which we have seen on this film or more than that and consider side effects when we make a business decision in the future.

  146. Inessa Kylymar

    The movie “The Corporation” describes the negative sides of corporations. Basically, it showed that there are no corporate responsibility and ethics the corporate environment. All the corporation cares about is its stockholders. As it was shown in the movie, the mindset, the corporation has, is that it will let others to deal with problems it’s created.
    The corporation is treated like a person. At some point in history, the lawyers used 14th Amendment (that used to protect slaves) to protect corporation and it was accepted by the court. Another interesting thing I found in the movie is how market traders used tragedies like 9/11, wars and bombing to make money. This is not even unethical; it is scary how traders were excited because of that. Also, they showed how Monsato tried to hide harmful effects of its product by falsification news. The court said that the media is allowed to lie and threw out the lawsuit against Monsato.
    In conclusion, I want to say, that the movie covered very interesting topic. Corporations are making money for shareholders, they give jobs to people, they produce necessary things for humans, but there is other side to it: child labor, sweatshops, making money out of war, pollution and adverse health effects, harm to the biosphere, hiding its wrong doings from the public by convincing or threatening media, even manipulating children into buying products and patenting anything that is alive except human being. But is there much people can do about it? Corporations have power; they get away with everything they do. If they are sued, they pay fines. But does it stop them from continuing its wrongdoings?

  147. Zach Schwartz

    The documentary titled “The Corporation” is a scathing critique of modern day corporations as we know them. The movie takes a strong stance against the concept of corporations and the negative impact that they have had as a whole on civilization and the earth. Modern times are dominated by the large corporation, and many privileges have been provided to them that almost allow them to be immune from gross wrongdoings. The theory of this documentary is that when corporations are in the wrong, this is not just a case of “a few bad apples”, but rather the case for the majority of these companies.
    There is a lot of ambivalence today about what the role of the corporation should be, is it responsible for only its shareholders and making a profit, or it responsible for the stakeholders as well? Accordingly it is under the “legal obligation” of corporations to put the profit of the shareholders first, which can lead to a lot of ethical conflicts of interest.

    Many interesting stories of corporate misdeeds which occurred in the past and still exist were brought up during this documentary. For example, chemicals which are manufactured to fill a certain need, for instance the clearing of brush in Vietnam, end up causing cancer. Companies frequently weigh the costs of obeying the law, and facing lawsuits, and if these are less than the cost of following the law and not making a profit, then the company will proceed as is. This is an unfortunate, yet accurate portrayal of how the corporate world is run. It is quite astonishing to see all the negativity done to the world to produce a single item for a company’s product line. There was a company that went as far as to create seeds, which are the ultimate creators of life, to ultimately kill themselves after one use. We as a society have to determine, when are we going too far?

    One of the more surprising and almost humorous, yet sad facts I learned from this documentary was that the “happy birthday” song- commonly sung around the world, is actually OWNED by a company. People have to request a copyright in order to use it, technically speaking. We have effectively given up our culture to corporations, and I think this is one of the clearest examples of this. Privatizing water, for instance, is going much too far. There are certain resources which everyone needs to survive, water being one of the main necessities that no human being can be without. Resources which everyone is not dependant on are acceptable to privatize, however, water and sun which are given to us by the earth should be easily accessible.

  148. The Corporation shocked me. I have never really thought of corporations as evil or deceiving. Being business student, I have always romanticized working for a big corporation, making the big bucks and gaining status. But seeing all the unethical practices that corporations involve themselves with really disgusts me.

    Although on the flip side, the documentary fails to note the fact that America has always been fighting against socialism and promoting capitalism. Corporations are the result of capitalism. We are a country, collectively whether we know it or not, are promoting corporations to exist. No matter how much we say we can resolve this by pushing out the existence of corporations, they will always be there unless we ditch the idea of capitalism. We can however influence their functions and practices by limiting of consumption of their services or products. We can also influence them by continuing the push for them to be sustainable. Our activists are doing a great job and it must be continued and not be discouraged by the massive power of corporations.

  149. Colin Campbell

    The Corporation

    In this documentary I found myself more than slightly taken aback by the seeming lack of responsibility demonstrated by the highlighted corporations. To be fair, I also see that many of the issues brought up in this documentary were not accurately portrayed, and the overall positive influence of corporations in the world as we know it were very much downplayed.
    One of the issues I found most interesting was the concept of privatizing what were once considered to be natural resources. The film mentioned that in the earlier stages of the growth of industrialism, there were certain resources referred to as “the commons” –or, resources that were so much a part of every person’s life that they were held too sacred to be simply exploited in the pursuit of profit. The sacredness and respect with which these resources were treated was primarily due to the fact that the commonly held belief was that these resources were given by God to society. In today’s culture, we seem to erode this notion of sacred spaces every chance we get, and now the biggest concern of corporations is how they are going to try to start protecting an environment that has been neglected for so long.
    Right now, I can see some of the benefits of both sides of this issue. If natural resources are to be left unprivatized, then it is the responsibility of every individual to respect and protect the resource and its use. I feel that the last 100 years have proven that the average citizen no longer feels that they have the power or the responsibility to truly act on the best interests of natural resources. If natural resources are privatized, then the owners will be able to act in the best interests of that resource. However, if owners of resources decide they will act unethically, then privatization of natural resources will only speed up the process of depletion and destruction of natural resources.
    The greater issue of the ethics and personal decisions remains as the largest factor in the success of either strategy. People motivated only by money, without any moral compass to guide how they act and think, will destroy natural resources and the basic trust of the consumer faster than they can repair the damage.

  150. Julio Romero

    The Corporation is a great documentary that details the history of the corporation, from its birth centuries ago to its place today. It also shows how over time the corporation has acquired the rights of man, without the great responsibilities along with it. “The corporation is legally bound to put its bottom line ahead of everything else, even the common good.” Over time, this system has concentrated wealth in the hands of the few, and marginalized everything else. A corporation is, like described in the movie, a self-created monster that perpetually craves profit and destroys everything else in its way. One particular part of the movie that I liked was when Howard Zinn talked about how Fascism in Europe was strongly supported by American corporations. After Hitler rose to power , he was strongly funded by American corporations such as IBM. Companies like IBM and the Union Banking Corporation put profit above their own country. One interesting tidbit is that Union Banking Corporation from New York City bankrolled Nazi Germany. Their Vice President was Prescott Bush, George Bush’s father, and George W. Bush’s grandfather. Just shows how corporations have grown so powerful that profit trumps basic law and justice.

  151. Andrew Lizotte

    This was an interesting movie, although it was quite long, bias and repetitive. While corporations have played a critical part in the advancement of our economy, their actions have often been to the detriment of their consumers. The question posed by the documentary is whether or not corporations should have the same responsibilities as people considering they have all the constitutional rights entitled to a person.
    The corporations discussed in this documentary all abided by the shareholder theory, which is that a corporation’s only concern is maximized shareholder wealth. With the only concern being profit, moral obligations are dismissed. For these corporations, it is in their best interest to act unethically if the benefit outweighs the negatives. For example, if a corporation can cut costs of ridding themselves of hazardous material through the means of pollution, they should do it if the savings are in excess of the fines they will receive. This view does not take into consideration the other people affected by the corporation.
    Seeing as I will be entering the workforce soon, this movie is extremely relevant to me. I have decided that money is a secondary concern and I primarily want to make sure that my work aligns with my own personal values. I don’t want to be one of those good guys in a bad organization.

  152. Katherine Han

    This movie opened my eyes to the business world because I never thought of it this way. The interesting thing was the movie compares a corporation as a psychopath. As a student studying management, I agree that corporations are out of control. Corporations have mighty power and the influence. Watching this movie I felt that corporations need to have responsibility on what they are putting out there in the society. What was expected in the movie was corporations set up wages so low and tries to keep it low by ditching people if they find cheaper labor. Also it was surprising to know IBM was involved with Nazi by providing machines. Although they didn’t actually killed millions of people, yet they were still responsible by providing what Nazi needed. I am sure corporations are not human beings but it still needs to have a sense of morality-though it is hard to follow.

  153. Alfred Chau

    “The Corporation” documents the origins of the corporation into the behemoth that it is in today’s society and economy. This documentary does a good job shedding light on the unethical practices that big corporations undertake in order to rake in greater profits, such as child labor and sweatshops, war profiteering, and environmental harm and pollution among many others. Even after watching this movie, I still want to work for a big corporation because as much as they may commit wrongdoings, they still provide jobs to many people and produce many necessities for consumers. At the same time however, I will take a closer look as I go grocery or clothes shopping since I now have a greater understanding of where the products have come from, whether it is from a cow injected with antibiotics or child labor sweatshops.

  154. Tim Lixfield

    This movie is a great movie to reflect on myself as well as corporations in the business world. It focuses on ethics and compares corporations to that of people. They have the same rights as people, so shouldn’t they have the same ethics? The film compares a corporation to that of a psychopath, and although a farfetched comparison, all of these corporations that surround us take part in evil doings. It’s amazing to see what a corporation will do to save a few pennies. I understand their way of thinking, and I would agree with their decisions to a degree, but there has to be some balance between maximizing profits and ethics. It’s easy for us to think of ethics as students, but when we own the business and those decisions will cost us money, it makes me wonder if I would do the same exact things. I watched this movie and tried to reflect on my own decisions, and I think I’m a bit of a monster.

  155. Jane Hamilton

    In the movie “The Corporation” we are given a look into the manner in which corporations can use their power and influence to bypass ethical behaviour and social responsibility. Although the movie was rather long, it was insightful into the thought process of a corporation; that being profit. It was interesting to see the timeline of how corporations came to have the right to be a separate legal entity, creating as the movie named it a “psychopath”. Unethical behaviour such as child sweatshops and lack of social responsibility through environmental harm and pollution are ongoing in order for corporations to save money, although in recent years many large corporations are attempting to show their “greener” side. It is easy to blame a corporation for its wrong doing however it is still people controlling the decision making process. It seems many workers have become greedy and such statements such as one person believing September 11th was good because the price of gold increased is sinful. I felt the movie was perceptive of the need of more corporate social responsibility, but at the same time one sided at times, generalizing all corporations.

  156. Andrew Perez

    The Corporation is an excellent movie for someone who wants to get a big picture on the daily operations and functions of a typically multinational corporation. Early on in the movie to set the tone, a typical corporation is compared to Frankenstein, a shark, or an eagle. All of these representations display common characteristics that a typical corporation, monsterous, aggressive in the pursuit of profits, and high in the sky in terms of vision over smaller companies and in terms of being able to see their own corporation as a big picture. Over the course of the movie key corporate issues get brought up like corporate social responsibility, interesting historical evolution of corporations, and issues regarding the safety and health of the general population in connection with corporations.

    “The Corporation” talks about some examples of corporate social responsibility. The first that alarmed me was that Nigeria gets very bad pollution due to Shell. In connection with that, a very large number of corporations were hit with fines when they were found to break government regulations. This shows that corporations are willing to extend their actions all the way to the limit, and if they have to cross the line, they will if the cost benefits outweigh the fines. Another example was the CEO of the carpet company, Ray Andersen, talking about the book “The Ecology of Commerce”. Andersen states how alarmed he was when he was realizing the negative effects his company was having on the extinction of animals. The last example of corporate social responsibility that was shocking was how underage workers were being exploited in Honduras, for very little pay.

    Some examples from the movie of the historical evolution of corporations that stuck out to me was how company’s advertised their products many years ago compared to present day. The movie showed that studies have been done that a large percentage of revenue that companies receive from their products or services comes from children nagging their parents. That really shows how important it is for companies to aggressive advertise their products. Another example of a company evolving over time is Disney. I had never known that a Disney community existed til I saw this movie!

    Safety and health issues regarding the general society with connection to corporations also was shown in some examples. The first being the Monsanto Milk issue. Monsanto was injecting their cows with a hormone to increase the amount of milk they produced. The problem with that was that the cows were becoming ill and an increasing amount of bacteria was being found in milk. An investigative news team tried to bring all of the actual statistics to light, but Monsanto quickly stepped in and had them edit their story. This shows that companies are willing to do everything possible to not let negativity about their company be broadcasted over the media. Some other examples of health/safety issues also included exploitation of workers in under-developed countries, testing of chemicals on humans many years ago, and outrageous events of violence in Bolivia over water.

    I really enjoyed watching this movie. It gave me a very clear picture of all the facets of a corporation and it was very informative. The Monsanto issue was very scary, I had never known about that until I saw this movie. This movie also showed me how rediculous things can get as the movie showed that some companies are trying to purchase oceans, land, etc. and even trying to patent life!

  157. In this documentary, corporations are portrayed as money-hungry businesses that do whatever operations are necessary to be lucrative. I was dumfounded by the amount of unethical activities that were occurring in corporations. It is ironic how the U.S. is constantly battling communism while encouraging capitalism, the very cause why corporations want to be successful so badly. I do not agree with the director’s portrayal of corporations in this documentary. An entity has to be profitable in one way or another. A corporation has to try to excel at the utmost even at some other firm’s expense. Without major companies in today’s world, I don’t think countries can be run. There has to be several major companies that dominate specialized industries. Also, the privatization of natural resources is another major issue that was mentioned in this documentary. Most people don’t feel the sense of responsibility to care for the environment. If the privatized companies are ethical in their use of natural resources, then the conservation of natural resources will be “successful” or the companies will efficiently use and not abuse their power to destroy the natural environment purely for profit motives. However, if privatized corporations are negligent, catastrophic results will occur. I am favoring the privatization of firms regarding natural resources. There are few things that the public can do to conserve the amount of natural resources that we have today.

  158. Although extremely one-sided, this documentary really opened my eyes to the negative aspects surrounding large corporations. These corporations are only interested on one thing, making profits and saving money whenever they can. And they will do anything they need to achieve this, no matter how unethical or immoral. The movie really points out the importance of corporate social responsibility, which is something that is avoided by corporations due to their power. Although it may be in their best interest to be unethical, I really think that these corporations need to start taking responsibility for their actions. Fortunately, the number that have become environmentally safer and “green” is increasing and will hopefully continue on this path, as well as beginning to take corporate social responsibility as a top priority. This movie really surprised me and I think that it is a movie that all business students should watch before going out into the world.

  159. Gregory McGuire

    The movie “The Corporation” shows some of the negative effects some corporations have on a society and questions whether they are corporately responsible or not. One of the topics bought up in the movie was that corporations were paying low wages to their workers in third world nations, and how ethical this is, to pay such low wages. On one hand the video gives the view that it is indeed unethical to pay these workers wages often lower than .10 cents an hour, as some would call this slave labor. It also shows that children in these nations work for these companies besides going to school which most would consider being unethical. One interesting thing about this part of the movie was when they showed children workers producing pants for Kathy Lee Gifford, which had a label on it which said “a portion of the proceeds from the sale of this garment will be donated to various children’s charities.” (The Corporation). I thought this was interesting because it shows Kathy lee Gifford doesn’t really care about helping children, but they want the public to think they do to, increase sales. In defense of these sweatshops, one corporate head in the movie basically conveys that without them , the people in these nations would be making nothing and these corporations are actually raising their standard of living, which does have some truth to it. Another ethical issue brought up in the movie was the cancer that the people get, caused by the manufacturing of products, or the product itself. The video raises the question on whether industries should be more regulated to help prevent bad products (such as ddt) or the pollution they create in creating them. In all, I think the movie shows that some corporations just like some people will not be ethical or corporately responsible. The problem is that the solution is not so easy, on one hand Governments could heavily regulate corporations which will make it harder for people to open up businesses and lead to lower economic activity. However, on the other hand if you do not have any regulation on businesses the least social responsible companies will make a profit at any cost even if it means abusing the population.

  160. Latoya Jn. Baptiste

    The Corporation is a documentary revealing the mindset and environment surrounding large Corporations. What’s interesting is how the film personifies the “corporation”. For example, according to the film, General Electric is considered to be a very old man who tells a lot of stories. These characteristics represents the way that consumers view the company. was The Corporation has become more and more like a person: someone who can sue, borrow money, sell property ect. The main goal of the Corporation is to achieve it’s bottom line and make enough money to satisfy their shareholders and deliver a good return on investment. I think that the ” bottom line” is the root cause of all of the scandals and unethical decisions that companies make. These companies do take some interest in giving back to the community and environment BUT only to say that they have done so and not to actually make a difference. So, one remedy to deal with these scandals would be have the government change the standards to which corporations live up to. Only then can companies decrease the importance of achieving a high return on investment. In my opinion, a company whose sole goal is to make money will always falter and CRASH and Burn….. sooner or later

  161. Jonathan Comack

    This film was kinda slow in going but i thought it was actually very good in bringing its point accross in Corporate Social Responsibility. I think it is entirely made by the one stock broker in the movie that says that until environment is a trade-able commodity who cares. They don’t have time to worry about it unless it effects there bottom line. I came accross this a lot in the simulation in judging whether to put money in CSR and whether it was cost effect in boosting the image of the company. The Simulation is a much better version of a business system though because the weight on image rating is so much lower when looking at corporate performance at least in my mind. I also especially liked the lack of CSR by the marketers in the movie, the arm of the company that is probably the most concerned with the image of the company. When putting this all together, you can get a terrible view of corporations. I do not think that though surprisingly, for me, I see it as an opportunity for people to get more involved in more areas and that a better educated populace along with stringent regulations can make the system better along with other entities. I see this as more options going forward which will help people the world over get a better world product. I mean even Milton Freidman who is the embodiment against CSR just says that if the government and the outside world impose conditions on the company that are good for the world over then stakeholder (the world community) would be in line with the principal agents of the company, or the stockholders.

  162. Lindsay Jean Stradley

    The movie The Corporation was all about companies and how they relate to the concept of corporate social responsibility. As we know, companies today to do not always act in ways which are beneficial to their employees, shareholders, and society in general. In fact many companies act purely out of greed. The movie examines that such companies who act out of greed and their own motives got to great lengths to get what they want and not let anyone stand in their way. It is easy to see today with companies like Enron, who out of their financial greed totally disregarded their shareholders, just how out of control companies can get. What the movies hints at is that companies should be going the extra mile to ensure the well-being of others , even if that means hurting their bottom line a little. While this movies only showed the bad side of corporate responsibility, it is valuable to know that there are companies out there who do act ethically and look out for the well-being of others before their bottom line.

  163. Jeffery Walburger

    The corporation was basically about how most corporations main purpose is to make money for their shareholders no matter the cost to the environment or the people living in it. First I was actually enlightened because I did not know when and why it ever became law that a corporation is considered a person. Whether this actually should be the case is left up for debate, but what is wrong is how the lawyers of the corporations came about being able to be considered a person, because of the court ruling, aka the 14th amendment. Also the movie talked about who should be held responsible for the wrongdoings of the corporation; particularly the low wages of the cities of the 3rd world countries that they take advantage, and how when the people do actually win a better wage rate all the corporations do is up and leave for a country that will supply lower wages, leaving the old country ravaged and poorer that it was before they came. I really enjoyed watching the movie because it did open the eyes a little about what SOME corporations will do to earn a profit, “greed is good” as the movie Wall Street says; is definitely shown in this movie. Lastly I really found it humors how the movie went through a checklist and a corporation passed, easily, about being a psycho path.

  164. Y.u.s.u.f - C.a.g.l.a.r - T.u.y.s.u.z.o.g.l.u

    The documentary begins with telling how legal protections were disabled with the 14th amendment in US law system. Corporations started to be called like people. They have right to sue or to be sued, also they have right to buy a house, sell a car, make profits. They were like human beings. However, documentary argues that corporations cannot be human beings because they do not have moral rights. Actually, they do not have to have moral rights.

    Most of the people, who wants to be in the business, do not want to do something risky, so that, they choose to be in the business by corporations, but with their own identity. Corporations make profits and owners have it, however, when it comes to the liability, owners do have limited liability for morality and for legal system.

    The Corporation documentary argues that the corporations doing all the illegal things like polluting the environment and hiring people with low wages. Moreover, it tells that corporations are buildings, cars, tables, papers etc. and they would not have moral rights like humans.

    Finally, the documentary tells us that the corporations are acting like psychopaths and proves that with a check-list during it. It gives us to understand the benefits and costs of having those corporations. It is a great mixture of the business world and helps us to understand what is going on in the big picture.

  165. This movie, like others have written is pretty complex. The documentary doesn’t touch base with only one aspect of a corporation and it’s negativity. From the beginning, the corporation was born with good intentions and while society is power hungry, corporate lawyers who sought benefit from the growing power of corporations, twisted the law to make the corporation a separate entity in which its participants had no legal liability. The corporation, seems indestructible. The corporation itself is a greedy, money hungry entity. Rather than looking out for stakeholders, its sole interests are meeting the expectations of the shareholders. The film is trying to get across that corporations, though considered a separate entity; they do not have the feelings/morals/values as a normal functioning person. They do not consider, the ideals that people should work for a living wage or that working conditions should be of acceptable standards. They do not consider the fact that exploitation of the poor and using child labor is wrong. Corporations do not consider the damage that they have on the overall affect of the people that they are surrounding (including health complications, death and the overall quality of life of the people that interact directly or rather indirectly with the corporations). There is so much harm that a corporation can do and solely for profit. CEOs that run the corporations have time and time found that they do not even visit the plants in which they employ exploited workers. And the rest of the film, diagnoses corporations as a psychopath, and proceeds to list negative examples and cases in which the corporation has damaged society, our environment, futures and any positive expectations that people have had. Yet, though the liability is limited for the corporation itself, people need to wonder at what point is the people behind the scenes of the corporation held responsible for the consequences of poor decisions. People will continuously and relentlessly ask what the the negative affects of corporate decisions and what a company can do to help the environment and continuously they will need to work on their own public image.

    The corporation I feel emphasizes a lot of negativity, but I wish it gave some light to the positive things that these entities can do. It’s a bit biased and I’m a little impartial to michael moore, especially if the film is citing his expertise in the area. It does shed light on a lot of the things that I didn’t know corporations were capable of doing, but I do feel that in the end, if a corporation or any small business is run by people who are corrupt and are narrow-minded in terms of goals, the corporation by itself will be a reflection of these people. Changes can be made, it’s up for people to do so.

  166. Oh btw. i don’t know why the post time is so far off. But I posted the above post at: 3/25/2010, 9:37Pm.

    – Linda

  167. Jennifer Morton

    “The Corporation” demonstrates the limitless possibilities of unethical behavior a corporation is capable of. It demonstrates the lengths that can be reached by the simple theory that a corporation is established for the sole purpose of profit and satisfaction of its shareholders. Its willingness to destroy the environment, manipulate human genes, povertize others, profit from disasters, withhold information, even manipulate the minds of children; is a testament to why we attempt to curb their behavior. When a corporation is created there is a life created (a person according to the law) and as demonstrated in this film that this corporate life can often behave life a child (or a psychopath) doing what it wants (to meet the expectations of its shareholders), often without acknowledging consequences. As the film brings to light it is the people’s job to assist in making the corporation grow up to its responsibilities in terms of its customers, the environment, and all those around the corporation that are also affected by its actions.

  168. To me, The Corporation proved to be an extremely biased, one-sided perspective on the role of the corporate entity in America. While I do not doubt at all that many corporations compromise ethics for the sake of monetary gain (aka stockholder benefit), this documentary pushed the notion with such one-sidedness that it could make one dismiss many of the otherwise plausible arguments. Nonetheless, this film does bring about some relevant points. The most interesting point brought to attention in this video is the government’s treatment of the corporation as a “human,” with the same rights that citizens of the US have (i.e 14th Amendment rights). I am in accord that this, by no stretch of the imagination, seems just and the government, and us as citizens, should take steps to fix this. Overall, the movie was definitely an eye-opener, especially the research done against well-known companies. Again, I was turned-off for some reason by the muckracking style of journalism. Moreover, I think it’s important to note that unethical behavior among corporations has since become increasingly public and more the population is aware and angered by it…and that is just the reaction that the makers of this film had hoped for, I’m sure.

  169. Tamara M Pitter

    The film The Corporation demonstrated several problems that concern corporations event to this day. The film makes point that a corporation’s main motive is to make a profit. Even if it entails complete disregard for what may be ethical or not.
    For instance, some corporations such as Monsanto, produced a growth hormone for cows, and omitted from their reports that it did not comply with safety standards and could potentially cause cancer.
    The film questions many of these ethical type situations, some more severe than others.

    I agree that many corporations neglect many ethical issues. A corporation is out to make a profit, and as long as it does so abiding by all laws, they are really doing nothing illegal.
    But does this mean that what they do is acceptable? In many cases most people would agree that it is not acceptable. Yet, society still enables the coruption to continue.
    For example, IBM produced systems for the Nazi’s in Germany during the Holocaust. IBM denies that they knew what the systems and computers were for, but there is substantial evidence that they did know.

    All in all corporations have set profits and bottom lines to hit, over the shareholders and the stakeholders, or the global community in which they operate in.
    Instead of being ETHICAL by fulfilling the obligations to the global community, shareholders, stakeholders, and workers, it seems many corporations have chosen to satisfy internally.
    But think about why be in business if I cant make the most money at my full potential??

  170. Katherine Higgins

    The movie, The Corporation basically shows us what we really all knew in the back of our heads. Maybe by bringing it out into the open, and make the unaware aware, things can begin to change. In school we learn about ‘ethics’, but such a thing can not be learned in a classroom. One’s ethical conduct is determined on their upbringing, and internal compass. The major root problem is kids being brought up thinking that they should do whatever they need to to get ahead. They grow up this way, it is no wonder that the men and women in big corporations (and thus the corporation as a whole) act only to prospure within themselves.
    The actual specific details brought out in the movie do move even those of us who are aware of the behavior corporations to want action.
    While corporations do have the main goal of profit, they need to be aware of the damage of being so narrow-sighted on this single goal- damned those in the way. The change in thinking needs to start on the individual level if it is ever to make an impact on the corporate level.

  171. Kaitlin Johnsen

    The Corporation is a documentary displaying the day by day operations of a multinational corporation and how the corporation chooses to deal with ethical dilemmas. It deals with the ethical issues we have just formerly learned about in class such as child labor, sweatshops, and pollution among many others for the sole purpose of increasing revenues (the shareholder theory). It sheds the light on how large corporations treat these ethical situations by involving in illegal business practices at the expense of the safety of others.

    The film does an excellent job at essentially flaunting multinational corporations as evil, manipulative, immoral, and will do anything to make a profit.

  172. Stephen Daley

    Today in class our professor brought up some interesting statistics that i thought applied extremely well to the movie the corporation. He stated that business students in surveys tended to show more unethical behavior that other college students as a whole. So just as the movie points out the Ethical decisions a company has to make when it comes to child labor laws, sweatshops, and pollution maybe it is not the business company but the types of people who run these companies. Either business people are teaching their children to be less ethical than those who declare other majors, teachers who mold the students are teaching them to be less ethical, or maybe the types of person who is interested in business as a major as a whole tend to have more unethical tendencies? I believe this movie shows the facts of how, when and why multinational corporations can cross the line very well. but where does it all start?

  173. Jordan Balais

    The movie ‘The Corporation’ is a very thought-provoking film which presents the innate negative nature of corporations. Corporations have become such a regular part of our everyday life that we don’t really notice how much they affect the world around us. The basis of the movie was to personify the corporation and examine its personality traits which becomes compared to that of a ‘psychopath’. This twist in the movie is very interesting because it makes a valid claim to how unethical and menacing the business world has become. It is a pretty bias viewpoint on the side that businesses are ultimately worried about profit and are only motivated for money purposes, which is a very viable statement since that is what drive corporations.The movie goes on to interview very top executives and makes the argument that since profit is the motive for the corporations, executives usually stray away from their own morals to fulfill the objectives of the corporation which also presents a problem. Studying from a business viewpoint, we usually fail to notice the whole affect of a corporation on the world around us. Especially as a consumer, we only notice the finish product and rarely questions the steps it takes to get it there. Since we are surrounded by multinational corporations, we get used to them and actually begin to praise them. However, going into the business profession one must realize that there’s there’s more behind it and we must be responsible in how we make our decisions. I think this movie is very eye-opening, especially to business students, because it makes a statement on the unethical behavior or businesses first-hand which we usually don’t get to see. Also, the film rises a question, what are we going to do to fix this? As a business student, I think it is our responsibility to help solve this problems by keeping our morals and ethics as we make our way into the business world.

  174. Steven Goldman

    The movie “The Corporation” sheds light on some of the overlooked aspects of having corporations in society. The movie presents corporations as bad apples, and overall shows a negative view of their existence. Social responsibility is the main problem with corporations as they blend the fine line between greed and ethics. Through interviews with top professors and business executives, the movie tries to expose the truth behind the corporate entity. One of the things I found most interesting about corporations was that legally they have the same rights as real people. In fact they are even protected under amendment 14 of the constitution. Corporations have the same rights as people; however, they do not have soul or physical body. It is made up of hundreds and sometimes thousands of people to produce profits. When trouble hits, it is often very hard to find where to point blame, as the employees have plausible deniability, in that each of them only makes up one small piece of the puzzle of the corporation. I find it hard to treat a corporation as a single entity when it is made of so many smaller pieces and the movie shows how this is one of the factors that lead to corporate greed. Each person does not feel entirely responsible for his actions; he is only doing his job in the puzzle. This is the same sort of dangerous thinking that lead to the Nazi Uprising in the 1930-1940s. In addition, the movie presents corporations as vehicles for propaganda. “Corporations do not sell products, they sell a way of life,” is how one professor put it. These entities operate under the means of public perception, in that they try to advertise the benefits of X or Y company to society. The movie states that they do this to hide the truth behind corporations, the desire and need to make money over all else. The movie shows that the corporation’s social responsibility is not in the good of society, but in making money for its shareholders. The corporation cares only about its own going concern of business, not the going concern of the general public. While I feel the movie does tend to be a bit biased in that it presents mostly all of the negative effects of companies and only skims over the positives (major engineering projects done by corporations, and technological advancement), it does shed some overlooked aspects of ethical concern. The movie may be a bit biased, but it is very informative and supports its points with evidence and opinions from reputable sources.

  175. Adrienne Martian

    First of all I would like to say to all those who told me to drink milk as a child… “see I was right” Milk is not good for you!” Corporations will do anything for the sake of making the bottom line look good. Even injecting growth hormones into the cows that supply us with the milk you (not I) use in your cereal in the morning. This documentary shed light on the main issue facing the increasing influence corporations hold over our government. The main issue is you and me. The people are the ones who supposedly give government the power, and to an extent we vicariously gave corporations the power they hold today. We allow virtual sociopaths to make the decisions that affect us yesterday, today, and in 20 years. If people really are so strongly opposed to the bail outs and power corporations hold stop whining about it and do something about it. If we sit back and let government ride along on corporate coat tails maybe we’ll see rainwater get privatized here too. (Kidding)

  176. Chase Murray

    The Corporation was a very interesting film that shows the amount of corporate abuses and crimes that takes place in the business world. This film sheds light on growth hormones, pollution of land, air, water, third world sweat shops, as well as many other corporate abuses. It proves the fact that many big corporations are in business strictly for the money and payoff and don’t care about being socially responsible.

  177. Pingback: Film Overview nedir, Hakkında Bilgiler

  178. I’m curious to find out what blog system you’re using?
    I’m having some minor security problems with my latest blog and I would like to find something more secure. Do you have any suggestions?

  179. Pingback: Social Activism Movies Thursday – Watch: ‘The Corporation’ (Jennifer Abbott & Mark Achbar, 2003) | Seminal Cinema Outfit

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s