See how Monsanto's dark operatives tell The New York Times what to write...

A Short Report on Journalists Mentioned in our FOIA Requests

Amy Harmon

Keith Kloor

Tamar Haspel

(NaturalNews) One of the truly fascinating revelations in the recent emails acquired from university professors who whore themselves out to Monsanto is the fact thatThese Monsanto operatives pretending to be journalists write for The Washington Post, New York Times, Discover, Slate, Nature and various "science" websites. Many of themand gladly accepting the money. Then they turn around and write stories attacking clean food activists or hawking whatever GMO propaganda Monsanto is pushing that day.It's all coordinated by sleazebag Monsanto front men like Jon Entine , a man seething with so much evil that he tried to strangle his wife in front of their own daughter, and installed surveillance equipment to spy on her activities in their own home, according to court documents published here on Natural News One of Jon Entine's "friends" in the industry is Monsanto prostitute Keith Kloor , another industry sleazebag who blogs for Discover and Nature where he systematically lies, distorts evidence, and fabricates false claims against clean food activists. He also writes for Slate, which was just named one of America's top 12 evil news publishers by EVIL.news Entine also rubs elbows with discredited Univ. of Florida academic prostitute Kevin Folta, recently exposed as a Monsanto shill by secretly taking $25,000 from Monsanto and promising them a "return on the investment" to push GMO propaganda. Folta even scammed The Atlantic into printing his propaganda as fact, and The Atlantic seems fine with it, refusing to issue a retraction after it all came to light that Kevin Folta was a paid Monsanto operative.Folta appears to be guilty of committing a second class felony crime under Florida's anti-corruption laws, by the way. The University of Florida so far refuses to fire him. Apparently, academic shillery and fraud are totally acceptable to the U of F.Now, the U.S. Right to Know campaign has published an overview of a few of the sleazebag journalists named in the now-public emails acquired via FOIA. These journalists include Tamar Haspel, a Monsanto prostitute writing for The Washington Post, and Amy Harmon, another biotech prostitute writing for The New York Times. These are all journalists who allow themselves to be influenced by people like Jon Entine, a biotech industry dirtbag whoand deliberately fabricates the most outrageous lies imaginable about his intended targets. (He once claimed I ordered Natural News readers to murder him, and to back it up he dredged up a police report of somebody else named Mike Adams who wasn't even born in the same decade as me. He then insinuated that that person was me. These are the type of sleaze tactics used by these Monsanto front men who interface directly with The New York Times and Washington Post. They wake up each morning, look in the mirror, and asks themselves, "What LIES can we spread today to discredit clean food activists?")"FYI, I think Ive talked Amy Harmon into doing a Hawaii story..." -- Jon Entine emailing Renee Kester about how Amy Harmon of The New York Times is on board with his agenda to smear anti-GMO activists in Hawaii. Kester is tied to the, an agrichemical industry front group.Read more about Jon Entine in these Natural News stories, and remember that this is the person The New York Times allows to propose story ideas and influence editorial coverage of GMOs:To help summarize the dirty tactics and misdeeds of journalists that are corrupted by Monsanto money, the U.S. Right to Know campaign director Gary Ruskin posted an overview of the journalists named in the documents Here's his full text, without all the hyperlinks. To see the fully hyperlinked version of this article, visit the original source On September 23rd, Washington Post food columnist Tamar Haspel admitted to receiving plenty of money from pro-agrichemical industry sources.Following her admission, I thought it might be useful to report on journalists  including Haspel  mentioned in the documents we have received from state public records requests.U.S. Right to Know is conducting an investigation of the food and agrichemical industries, their PR firms and front groups, and the professors who speak for them.So far, three reporters come up in interesting ways: Amy Harmon, Keith Kloor and Tamar Haspel.These reporters appear in the context of Jon Entine, who is perhaps the leading PR operative working to promote the views of the agrichemical industry, and its pesticides and GMOs. Entine is founder and executive director of the Genetic Literacy Project, which, along with the PR firm Ketchum s GMO Answers , are the agrichemical industrys two most visible front groups. Entine is also founder and president of the PR firm ESG MediaMetrics, whose clients have included the agrichemical giant Monsanto.Amy Harmon is a reporter for the New York Times. She was part of a Times team that won a Pulitzer Prize in 2001, and in 2008 she won a Pulitzer for explanatory reporting.On September 23, 2013 at 7:44pm, Jon Entine emailed Renee Kester: FYI, I think Ive talked Amy Harmon into doing a Hawaii Hawaii [sic] story. . . and I gave her your and Kirbys email information, so she may call at some point if she indeed pursues this. Kirby Kester is president of the Hawaii Crop Improvement Association, an agrichemical industry front group.On January 4, 2014, the New York Times published a front-page article by Amy Harmon, titled A Lonely Quest for Facts on Genetically Modified Crops. The story is datelined from Kona, Hawaii.In 2014, Harmon won second place for the Society of Environmental Journalists Kevin Carmody Award for Outstanding In-depth Reporting, Large Market for The Facts About GMOs, a series that included the article A Lonely Quest for Facts on Genetically Modified Crops.On September 30th, Harmon is scheduled to speak to the Cornell Alliance for Science, a group funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to promote GMOs. The group is running a petition against U.S. Right to Knows Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.Keith Kloor is a freelance journalist who has written for Nature, Science Insider, Discover, Slate and other outlets. Kloor has written many pro-GMO articles that have been featured by Jon Entines Genetic Literacy Project.Kloor is mentioned in two places in the FOIA documents.In one email, Jon Entine refers to Keith Kloor as a very good friend of mine.In another email, on October 18, 2014, Dr. Channapatna Prakash, a GMO advocate and dean at Tuskegee University, emails Adrianne Massey of the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), along with several others, to forward an alert from Lorraine Thelian, vice chairman of the PR firm Ketchum that the hacker community Anonymous is planning a series of attacks on biotechnology and food industry websites Trade association and corporate websites of CBI [Council for Biotechnology Information] members are being targeted in this planned attack. Dr. Prakash writes, Adrianne I have copied Kevin Folta, Karl von Mogel, David Tribe and Keith Kloor here as well.Dr. Prakash ccd the email to Jay Byrne (former director of corporate communications for Monsanto), Jon Entine, Bruce Chassy (agrichemical industry advocate) Val Giddings (former VP of BIO), Henry Miller (agrichemical industry advocate), Drew Kershen (agrichemical industry advocate), Klaus Ammann, Piet van der Meer, Martina Newell-McGloughlin (agrichemical industry advocate), Karl Haro von Mogel (member of the board of directors of Biology Fortified, a pro-GMO website), Kevin Folta (agrichemical industry advocate), Keith Kloor and David Tribe (agrichemical industry advocate).Keith Kloor was the only journalist who received this email.The email implies that Kloor works closely with the agrichemical industrys prominent advocates.Kloor has written three articles that were critical of U.S. Right to Knows FOIA requests, in Science Insider, Discover and Nature.On March 23rd, 2015, Kloor gave a talk for the Cornell Alliance for Science, which is hosting a petition against U.S. Right to Knows FOIA requests.Tamar Haspel is a columnist at The Washington Post. She has written many columns for the Post defending or praising GMOs that have later been featured by Jon Entines Genetic Literacy Project.In 2015, Haspel won the James Beard Foundation Award for her Post columns.In June 2014, Haspel spoke to a pro-industry conference about How can scientists best engage the GMO debate with a skeptical public? The conference was coordinated by Jon Entine and Cami Ryan, who is currently social sciences lead for Monsanto. The conference was led by two agrichemical industry front groups, the Genetic Literacy Project and Academics Review, along with the University of Florida, which receives major funding from agrichemical companies, as noted in a September 6 article in the New York Times.Haspel also moderated a panel organized by the North Carolina Biotechnology Center, which provides long-term economic and societal benefits to North Carolina through support of biotechnology research, business, education and strategic policy statewide.In a September 23 chat hosted by The Washington Post, answering a question about whether she receives money from industry sources, Ms. Haspel wrote that, I speak and moderate panels and debates often, and its work Im paid for. Later that day, I asked Ms. Haspel on Twitter how much money she had received from the agrichemical industry and its front groups. She replied, Since any group believing biotech has something to offer is a front group, plenty!Is it appropriate for a Washington Post columnist to write glowing columns about GMOs while appearing at such pro-industry conferences? Is it a conflict of interest for Haspel to accept money from agrichemical company interests that she covers as part of her beat as a Post food columnist? How much money has Haspel received from agrichemical industry interests?Some journalists have criticized journalists for buckraking on speakers circuits. For example, former Washington Post Executive Editor Ben Bradlee said, I wish it would go away. I dont like it. I think its corrupting. If the Insurance Institute of America, if there is such a thing, pays you $10,000 to make a speech, dont tell me you havent been corrupted. You can say you havent and you can say you will attack insurance issues in the same way, but you wont. You cant.Haspel wrote in the Washington Post that she will only speak at events where if for-profit companies are involved in the event (which they often are), they cant be the only voice. So, I will speak at a conference co-sponsored by, say, Monsanto and the USDA and NC State University, but not an event sponsored by Monsanto alone. However, at the June 2014, conference at which Haspel spoke, no consumer advocates were slated to speak, only pro-industry advocates.On October 16, Haspel is scheduled to speak to the Cornell Alliance for Science, a pro-GMO group that is hosting a petition against U.S. Right to Knows FOIA requests.Haspel has been critical of the U.S. Right to Know FOIA requests. On August 17, on Twitter, she wrote: The money/time/brainpower wasted on @garyruskins mean-spirited, self-interested attack on @kevinfolta! Can we move on to something useful? Others did not agree with her news judgment. On September 6th, two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Eric Lipton wrote an article largely based on our FOIA requests  especially of University of Florida Professor Kevin Folta  which ran on the front page of the Sunday New York Times. The article revealed how Folta, who repeatedly denied ties to Monsanto, in fact had received an undisclosed $25,000 grant, as well as writing assignments from the company, and worked closely with it and its PR firm Ketchum, which ghostwrote text for him and organized media and lobbying meetings for him.U.S. Right to Know is a consumer advocacy group. We try to expose what the food industry doesnt want us to know. We believe it is useful for the public to see how the food and agrichemical companies do their public relations work. That is one way we can help consumers to assess the claims and information they receive from the companies involved in our food production, their PR firms and operatives, and the journalists who work with them.