Palm oil and publicity has long been a corrosive mix and now the renowned economist and sustainable development expert Jeffrey Sachs has felt its sting.
The tale is a complicated but instructive one, weaving together the world's biggest palm oil producer, discredited TV shows shown on the BBC and CNBC, a now-bankrupt media company and Sachs, professor of sustainable development at Columbia University. Sachs appears to be guilty of nothing but, in my opinion, a degree of naivety. Yet the way in which the media company sought to co-opt his reputation reveals the ruthlessness of the PR business.
First things first. Palm oil is both widely used, especially in food, but also widely derided by green campaigners for frequently resulting in deforestation, huge carbon emissions, loss of orang-utans and many other species, as well as land and workers' rights conflicts.
Malaysia - with Indonesia, the world's biggest producers of palm oil - was the subject of some of the TV shows, made by UK-based FBC Group. But FBC - standing amusingly for Fact Based Media - were in the pay of the Malaysian government and Malaysian palm-oil titan Sime Darby. Eight of these aired on BBC World News, and the BBC Trust ruled on Wednesday that they seriously breached rules governing conflicts of interest, promotion of a sponsor's activities and sponsorship of current affairs shows.
Some of the shows featured Sachs. FBC bragged to Sime Darby that their "track record" included "cultivation of influential 'ambassadors' such as Sachs".
Sachs flatly denies any such influence and says he "never sought nor received a single penny from Sime Darby" and "of course, would never serve as an 'ambassador' or 'champion' for Sime Darby". He says he did not know Sime Darby were paying FBC.
In 2009, the same year the TV shows, Sime Darby committed $500,000 to the Earth Institute at Columbia, of which Sachs is the director. "This was not a 'payment,' this was specific support for two existing scientific programs run by the Earth Institute," says the statement Sachs's office sent to me.
I asked him if Sime Darby would be allowed to remain a "Corporate Circle" member of the Earth Institute? "The reports raise very serious issues. Sime Darby came to us declaring their desire to pursue a new agenda on sustainable development and asking for our scientific help in designing those policies. We hope that is real. The [news] of course will lead us to re-examine this relationship, and see if it was indeed driven by PR considerations."
Sachs also wrote an article mentioning Sime Darby for an advertising supplement published in the International Herald and Tribune in June 2008. It praised "promising steps" being made in Malaysia but noted "it remained to be seen" if the policies would "triumph over intense market pressure". It ran alongside a piece from Tun Musa Hitam, chairman of Sime Darby and former deputy prime minister of Malaysia. Sachs was aware the supplement was paid for by the Malaysian government but was not paid. Sach's statement says: "The comments and message are his own and reflect his real concerns about the need for sustainability and better practices in the industry."
I asked Sachs if he thought there was any conflict of interest in all of this. "Of course not. Sime Darby came to Professor Sachs and asked for help on sustainability and for the Earth Institute's scientific support and guidance on sustainability. We took their request for our help in good faith."
Kenneth Richter, a campaigner at Friends of the Earth, says: "The rapid growth in palm oil plantations is one of the greatest threats to south east Asian rainforests and the species that depend on them. Jeffrey Sachs would be wise to steer clear of the multi-million pound greenwash operation of this highly disreputable industry."
Sime Darby accept they paid FBC and were engaged in a campaign "to establish and project the 'new' Sime Darby brand on a global platform." But the company says: "There was never any intention, stated, implicit or suggested, that FBC embark on a greenwash campaign to boost the company's image." It also denies the $500,000 committed to the Earth Institute was an PR stunt.
But the history of palm oil publicity is a sorry one. The body the industry hopes will clean up its reputation is the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. This body, which Malaysian and Indonesian interests have a record of obstructing, does not include carbon emissions in its environmental impacts. By their own admission, 40% of Sime Darby's palm oil does not even meet RSPO standards.
The well-funded palm oil PR offensive is showing no signs of letting up. The Malaysian government is ploughing €5.5m into combating anti-palm-oil campaigns. Earlier this year, Malaysia and Indonesia - who produce 90% of the world's palm oil - joined forces to lobby in Europe.
Under this onslaught, everyone involved in sustainable development and environmental issues - including Sachs - should exercise great caution. Because if you give them an inch, the spinmeisters will take a mile.