The Corporation | Documentary | 2-hour Version

The documentary begins by establishing the modern business corporation as the dominant institution, comparing its pervasiveness to historical entities like the Church or monarchy. It highlights a recurring debate where corporate scandals are attributed to 'a few bad apples,' deflecting systemic criticism. Examples like Tyco, WorldCom, Xerox, Enron, and Kmart are cited as instances where this 'bad apple' rhetoric was used to downplay a deeper crisis of confidence in business practices.

Various individuals offer their metaphors for a corporation, ranging from a jigsaw piece and a sports team to a family and a soaring eagle. However, critics argue that corporations are often akin to artificial monsters driven solely by profit. The film notes that many within the business community prefer terms like 'business' or 'company' over 'corporation,' especially when the latter implies a 'corporate agenda' with negative connotations.

The documentary traces the modern corporation's origins to the industrial age and its transformation from a subordinate entity serving the public good to a dominant force. A pivotal moment was the reinterpretation of the 14th Amendment, originally passed to grant equal rights to black people, which was used by corporate lawyers to grant corporations legal personhood, giving them rights similar to individuals but without moral conscience. This facilitated the prioritization of shareholder interests above all else.

The film asserts that corporations are legally bound to prioritize financial interests, even over the public good. This leads to 'externalities,' where costs of business (e.g., environmental damage, social harm) are offloaded onto third parties or society. The metaphor of a corporation as an 'externalizing machine,' similar to a shark being a 'killing machine,' is used to explain how corporations are designed to achieve objectives efficiently, often without regard for broader harm.

Through the work of the National Labor Committee, the documentary exposes instances of extreme labor exploitation in global supply chains. It highlights the stark contrast between the retail price of goods (e.g., a $14.99 shirt) and the meager wages paid to workers (e.g., 3 cents for the same shirt). The story of Kathy Lee Gifford's clothing line, produced by 13-year-olds in Honduras for minimal pay, illustrates how companies benefit from exploiting cheap labor in developing nations, often under the guise of philanthropy or economic development.

The film shifts to environmental issues, describing the rise of synthetic chemicals after 1940 and the subsequent acknowledgment of their hazards, including cancer and birth defects. It claims that industries knowingly downplay these risks, drawing a parallel between intentionally exposing people to harmful chemicals and criminal acts. A list of 'top corporate criminals' of the 1990s showcases numerous corporations fined for environmental violations, fraud, and antitrust issues, emphasizing that obeying the law often becomes a cost-benefit analysis for corporations.

The documentary explores the idea of a corporation as a psychopathic entity. By examining characteristics of psychopathy (e.g., disregard for others' rights, deceitfulness, lack of empathy), it argues that the legal structure of corporations inherently encourages such behavior. While individual CEOs may be thoughtful, their institutional role within the corporate framework often forces them into 'monstrous' actions due to the overarching mandate to maximize profit. This is exemplified by the contrast between a CEO's personal concerns and companies like Shell Nigeria's environmental destruction.

The film reveals the extent of corporate ruthlessness through the eyes of a 'competitive intelligence' spy who infiltrates companies to gather information for competitors. It also criticizes the lack of diversity in corporate leadership, suggesting that decisions are made by a narrow demographic detached from global realities. The core theme is consumer manipulation, particularly targeting children through sophisticated marketing tactics designed to create 'artificial wants' and drive consumption.

The documentary warns against the privatization of essential services, arguing that it transforms public institutions into unaccountable tyrannies driven by profit. The example of private fire services ignoring burning houses without contracts illustrates the dangers. A significant portion focuses on the commodification of life itself, spurred by the landmark Chakrabarty case that allowed the patenting of living organisms. This has led to corporations owning genes and other biological blueprints, raising ethical concerns about life's intrinsic value versus commercial utility.

This segment highlights how global media corporations, influenced by powerful advertisers, can suppress information. The case of two Fox News reporters, Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, is presented. They attempted to expose the dangers of Monsanto's rBGH in milk, but their story was repeatedly censored and altered by Fox executives under pressure from Monsanto. Despite winning a lawsuit for wrongful termination, the appeals court ruled that falsifying news is not illegal, showcasing the media's vulnerability to corporate influence.

The film explores the historical link between corporations and tyrannical regimes, citing the privatization of water in Bolivia as an example where corporate interests led to violent clashes against impoverished citizens. It revisits IBM's complicity with the Nazi regime, providing punch card machines for tracking concentration camp prisoners, highlighting how corporate allegiance to profit can override moral considerations or national loyalties.

Despite the pervasive influence of corporations, the documentary concludes with stories of resistance and hope. It showcases how individuals and grassroots movements have successfully challenged corporate power, from exposing sweatshops with Kathy Lee Gifford to revoking patents on natural resources (like neem and basmati rice) and advocating for sustainable practices. The film suggests that by holding corporations accountable and fostering collective action, a more just and sustainable world is possible, where human well-being and ecological health are prioritized over unchecked profit.