I too have an issue with Chevron providing transport, lodging, and meals to the article's author, and undoubtedly steering her in the direction of their spin. I believe Gail to be an honest person, but sometimes propagandists/lobbyists (redundant, I know) prey upon honest people.

"While I don't have direct evidence to show that all of these allegations are false, I think one should categorize the statements regarding harassment as myths, unless Fajardo or the ADC can produce evidence to back them up."

This means that sworn testimony should be disregarded, especially when the techniques used to perpetrate the allegations are invariably the kind where hard evidence virtually impossible to come by. I would recommend that we don't slant the playing field so obviously in future articles.

Isn't an all expenses trip a bribe? Why didn't Chevron instead hit the "Donate" button on the top left of this page without any conditions on the use of the funds? Should TOD have a simple ethics policy to guide editors and posters? At least the offer from Chevron should have been posted online for discussion.

I agree.

Alan

Um... yeah, this is pretty amazing. I can't think of a more efficient way for a key TOD writer to publicly self-destruct than by taking Chevron cash to gather the factoids for this little piece of off-topic corporate PR. What a disappointing and discrediting choice, for both Gail and TOD.

Who took the photos for this post? In figures 11 through 14 in the photos PDF the date is 07/07/2007. These are Chevron photos? The PDF properties says "Microsoft Word - Photos of the FDA and Cabrera.doc" and "Author: krdq".

The photos associated with Figure 1 (which is the ones I assume you are talking about) are Chevron photos. I don't know the details. A date of 07/07/2007 would be reasonable.