Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

VCU and the Evil Weed

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

VCU and its President Eugene Trani are coming off very badly in a public relations disaster that is largely to their making. In a recent front page article, The New York Times asked reasonable questions about taking money from Philip Morris USA under provisions that appear to violate even VCU’s rules in terms of research disclosure and academic freedom. But Trani – and the Richmond establishment – obfuscated, giving the school and the region a national black eye.

VCU spokespeople confirm that the language in the so-called “research services agreements” from Philip Morris USA forbade anyone from even talking about the contract. In a creepy stipulation, if the news media even asked questions, they were to be reported right away to the tobacco firm. Even VCU admits that its other “research service agreements” do not claim such stringent language.

Trani says the Times misunderstood and that all is on the up and up. The American Association of University Professors does not agree. Some 15 elite universities have banned tobacco funding altogether. And even when the nation’s No 12 researcher, Duke University, accepted a $30 million grant from Philip Morris to get people to stop smoking, it insisted on tough language that gave it complete freedom over research and the scientific inquiries, unlike VCU.

The research from the VCU contracts will be published after a review for proprietary information from Philip Morris. There may not be a massive erosion of academic freedom in the VCU case. It seems more that a less prestigious school anxious for corporate funding agreed to contract language that a more prestigious school might have refused on principle.

Philip Morris is what it is – a rich, secretive company that makes deadly products and is not afraid to throw its weight around. VCU is what it is, a third tier school. Trani and VCU have some soul-searching and some answering to do, especially since they hope to boost the school’s R&D at the Virginia Biotechnology Research Park, heavily funded by Philip Morris. Sleazy and secretive just isn’t the way to go. Read the column in Bacon’s Rebellion.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

13 responses to “VCU and the Evil Weed”

  1. The Logician Avatar
    The Logician

    It’s startling how often I, as a native Richmonder, catch myself having to explain Richmond’s relationship with Philip Morris to outsiders. I can’t forget an occasion when, while in Illinois, I identified Richmond as my hometown, and received as a response “Oh yeah, the city with the giant cigarette by the interstate.” It is a part of who we are as a city, and it comes as no surprise that its apologists are many.

    But let us not forget the sole purpose of Philip Morris: It exists to make money, as much as possible, for its shareholders and executives, by developing, manufacturing, and marketing a highly addictive and very deadly product. Please, take a minute and re-read that. It’s a fantastically chilling Mission Statement.

    Yes it’s got a well funded PR campaign beguile the public. It talks a swell game about wanting to curb youth smoking and promote cessation programs. But they’re still in the primary business of making money by selling tobacco, and the last thing it wants are fewer customers and more regulation.

    They are the corporate equivalent of a drug cartel. Is the product legal? Sure. Is it ethical? Not a chance in hell.

    Mr. Galuzka is 100% correct in that PM has a proven track record of corruption and deception. If Trani believes that they, in good faith, will limit their publication editing rights purely to proprietary data, he’s either a fool or a liar. My money isn’t on “fool.”

    We, as Richmonders, too often stick our collective heads in the sand with regard to one of our flagship companies. We all know people who work there. We grew up with it in our consciousness. But it is what it is, and even if this contract constitutes only 1/10 of 1% of their research budget, I, for one still don’t want my public universities in bed with it.

  2. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Sometimes when I read stuff like this – I think – there HAS to be a backstory. I mean it’s hard to believe that one of the execs from PM trooped into the Presidents office with a deal he could not refuse.. right?

    You know .. like these guys attend the same social events, golf, charity hoo doos .. travel in the same circles and they start talking… “gee.. do you think we could collaborate on some studies”?.. a “win-win” for both company and academia… ?

    and one thing leads to another and before you know it.. the foxes have taken over the hen house..

    but I would be curious to know what it took the NYTIMES to get the truth out… was the RTD down on the same golf course with those other guys?

    so.. the Richard Florida idea about cities that have “personalities”…where does that put Richmond’s Personality?

    I guess the Soprano persona is already taken.. right?

  3. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    OK, Peter, at the risk of being deemed an “apologist” for the Richmond establishment, I’ll rise to the bait.

    There are a number of levels to this debate.

    First, which you lightly touch upon, is the ethics of VCU conducting any kind of research at all for Philip Morris. Some 15 notable universities have sworn off tobacco money of any kind, you note. Of course, that leaves only 600 (or more) other research universities that have not. I don’t think that exactly makes VCU a pariah

    Your stronger point focuses on the restrictive terms of the VCU research that (a) requires researchers to notify Philip Morris of any press inquiries, and (b) allows Philip Morris to review the research and block publication.
    Given the highly controversial nature of Philip Morris’s line of business — manufacturing cigarettes, which cause cancer — I think this is a legitimate topic for debate. Will Philip Morris use this power to restrict publication of findings it doesn’t like, and should VCU be party to that?

    Unfortunately, you don’t complete the loop in your logic. You haven’t shown that PM USA has actually used this power to suppress any VCU research data, nor have you demonstrated that the research projects affected by this language are potentially sensitive in any way.

    The fact is, we know very little about the research that PM USA has sponsored at VCU, other than the fact that the numbers are pretty small — $300,000 in the current year. Oh, and we do know this: One research project focused on and phosphorous flowing into the James River watershed from its Park 500 tobacco processing plant in Chesterfield County — which doesn’t remotely touch upon controversial matters of cigarettes and health.

    The other current project is related to “lung disease.” That could potentially be sensitive, but it is not necessarily tied to tobacco use. The study may simply be examining underlying disease processes, most likely at a molecular level. The fact is, we don’t know.

    You can respond, not unreasonably, that the reason we don’t know is because of the secrecy that Philip Morris imposed on the contract. But, then, I would respond that we could obtain a copy of the contract, just like the New York Times did when it got this whole controversy rolling, before presuming VCU’s guilt in agreeing to something nefarious.

  4. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    What was really embarrasing was the so-called news article that the Richmond Timesdispatch did following the New York Times piece. It read like an editorial rebuttal of the Times article and served as practically a Chamber of Commerce press release on behalf of VCU claiming the University did no wrong. The article had no balance and failed to include any perspective other than pro-VCU.

    The article also failed to mention Gene Trani’s other closer-than-close ties to Big Tobacco. Thank goodness for “Style Weekly”:

    http://www.styleweekly.com/article.asp?idarticle=17075

    Eugene Trani’s connection to the tobacco industry runs deep.

    The New York Times reported last week that Virginia Commonwealth University inked a controversial research deal with Philip Morris USA in 2006. The deal prohibits researchers at the public university from publishing their findings without a longer-than-usual review process from the company. Between the restricted contract and other moneys, Philip Morris gave $1.3 million to VCU last year.

    But Trani, VCU’s president, has gotten more from the tobacco industry than a million bucks. In fact, Trani is the tobacco industry.

    As a member of the board of directors of Universal Corp., Trani receives an annual retainer of $40,000, including stock options. He also receives a fee of $2,000 for each board of directors’ meeting he attends and another $1,500 for attending committee meetings.

    Based in Richmond, Universal Corp. is a leaf tobacco merchant and processor. The company’s Web site describes its operations as “selecting, buying, shipping, processing, packing, storing, and financing of leaf tobacco in tobacco growing countries for sale … throughout the world.”

    Though it does not manufacture cigarettes, the Web site says “the Company’s revenues are derived from sales of processed tobacco and from fees and commissions for specific services.”

    “I don’t see any connection between these two,” university spokeswoman Pam Lepley says. “And his being on the board doesn’t really pertain to the university.”

    As for Philip Morris contract, Lepley says it’s a logical agreement since the university research would start from proprietary Philip Morris information. News of the contract, however, has raised questions about the ethics of such an arrangement.

    A representative for Universal directed all inquiries about Trani’s involvement to the company’s official corporate filings. On May 22, the day the story about VCU’s involvement with Philip Morris broke, Universal’s stock was trading at $61.44 a share.

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Trani should not have messed with Oregon Hill.

    http://www.oregonhill.net/2007/09/19/trani-and-tobacco/

  6. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Jim Bacon,
    It is disappinting that you’ve chosen to be an apologust for Trani, VCI and Philip Morris.

    I do not have to “complete the circle” of logic in any case here. The point is not whether the research itself is benign. The point is that PM put strictures on discussing the contracts and requiring the administration to run tattle tale to PM if a reporter started asking questions.

    Duke got a $30 million grant from PM and didn’t have to dance to this tune.

    Can you say why Duke did so and VCU did not?

    College campuses must act in a realm of free speech and academic freedom. In this case, the exact nature of the research is secondary — a point you are missing in your efforts to defend what yuou believe is “Richmond”. And, plenty of people out there in intellectual-land think that doing ANYTHING with a tobacco company is a non-starter. That’s a legimiate view and I tend to agree with it. But then, when I was in college about the time you were, I was not a member of the Young Americans for Freedom. Far from it.

    Peter Galuszka

  7. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Peter, calling me an “apologist” for Trani, VCU and Philip Morris is akin to me calling you a “cheerleader” for anti-smoking zealots. Likewise, labeling me as a “defender of Richmond” is no more helpful than me labeling you a “Richmond hater.” Ad hominem attacks don’t change the facts.

    Let’s stick to the facts we know. If you want to get all worked up over boilerplate contractual language applied to an study regarding nitrogen and phosphate emissions into the James River, and characterize it as a VCU desperate for research dollars knuckling under to the evil tobacco company, then be my guest. I think you’re making a mountain out of molehill.

    As I’ve said before, these are legitimate issues, and people should ask questions about the contracts. I’ve never denied that. It’s even possible, once all the facts are in, that people can reasonably conclude that VCU should refuse to agree with the restrictive language of the PM USA contracts. But we need to know more of the particulars.

    To quote Macrina from your story, “Other research service agreements that VCU has with other corporate sponsors do not contain such stringent wording. The reason, he says, was that there were third parties besides Philip Morris who were supplying proprietary data for the project.”

    You blow that off as an excuse, noting that Macrina won’t identify the parties without a FOIA request. Well, maybe it’s not B.S. I don’t know enough to know. But I don’t think you know enough to know either.

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Jim,
    Your blowing off “boilerplate contract language” is simply too pat and simple and disingenuous an answer. It is a dodge.
    If this is boilerplate, why doesn’t VCU use it in its other “research service agreements?” If you read the blogs and the Times story and my story you’d find that reputable academics, including one from my alma mater, say that what VCU is wrong.
    Sorry if I sounded ad hominum, but your defense of VCU and PM in R’Biz and your lame excuses for them frankly turned my stomach.
    I really do think that the “Richmond” we know and love so much is a better place, worthy of better treatment than what Trani and his apoloogists, including you, have given it.

    Peter Galuszka

  9. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    The best idea for any school is to refuse to take money from Philip Morris or RJ Reyolds. You’d be hard pressed to find less honest or more devious groups than big tobacco companies.

  10. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    “Add to it the snooty, chip-on-your-shoulder parochialism that is just so, well, “Richmond.”

    Let me see if I have this right:

    1. This guy Trani makes $400,000 per year as President of VCU. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_P._Trani

    2. He sits on the board of Universal Corp where he makes somewhere north of another $40,000 per year.

    3. Universal Corp is a tobacco company that grows tobacco for sale to the end product manufacturers.

    4. Trani agreed to a strange research deal with Philip Morris. The contract contained some unusual language.

    5. Is Philip Morris a customer of Universal Corp? In other words, does PM buy tobacco from UC?

    6. Should the president of a university who is a paid board member of a tobacco company agree to unusual deals with another tobacco company?

    And who else is on the Board of Directors of Universal Corporation?

    Walter A. Stosch

    I wonder where Henrico’s own Walter A. Stosch stands on Virginia’s proposed state-wide smoking ban?

    Or, Northern Virginia’s proposed ban on smoking in restaurants?

    http://www.richmondsunlight.com/bill/2008/hb1063/

    Do I have this right – a guy on the board of directors for a tobacco company and an elected representative gets to vote on smoking ordinances in regions where he does not live or work?

    I’ll give him some credit for maintaining the appearance of independence. He abstained from this vote (which passed the Senate only to be killed later in committee):

    http://www.richmondsunlight.com/bill/2008/sb298/

    Yet the amount of money involved in tobacco and Virginia would seem to argue against any elected official serving on the board of a tobacco company – no? Or, doing anything related to Dominion – no?

  11. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/wb/163242

    Editorial: VCU’s deal with the devil

    A public university shouldn’t sign over its rights — or those of its faculty members — to win research funding from any industry.

    It isn’t clear how much research money Virginia Commonwealth University received from Philip Morris USA.

    But whatever the amount, it could not be worth the price paid by the public university, which signed a deal with the devil to get the cash.

    The New York Times obtained a copy of the contract through the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. In exchange for an undisclosed amount of money (apparently less than $1.3 million), VCU signed over its researchers’ academic freedom.

    Professors cannot publish the results of their research, or even discuss the research with a third party, without permission from Philip Morris.

    Most of the fruits of the research — patents and intellectual property — will go to the company.

    The arrangement is extremely troubling, especially for a public university.

    Sheldon Krimsky, a professor at Tufts University who is an expert on corporate influence on medical research, told The Times, “When universities sign contracts with these covenants, they are basically giving up their ethos, compromising their values as a university. There should be no debate about having a sponsor with control over the publishing of results.”

    Indeed, there appears to have been little debate at VCU, despite the fact that the arrangement violates the university’s own rules and standards — which require ensuring that professors and students are free to publish results of research they conduct.

    The guidelines for industry-sponsored research also mandate that the university retain patents and intellectual property rights.

    “There is restrictive language in here,” Francis L. Macrina, Virginia Commonwealth’s vice president for research, told The Times. “In the end, it was language we thought we could agree to. It’s a balancing act.”

    There is no balance, though. The power all rests with Philip Morris. It gets the legitimacy conferred by research conducted by a public university without sacrificing any control.

    The Times performed an invaluable public service by exposing this contract, which had gotten little notice and no debate among the university’s faculty.

    That debate should start now. Scientific inquiry at a public university should not be a business undertaking.

    If Philip Morris — or any other corporation — wants such restrictions, it should find private consultants to do the work.

    And VCU should look for research funding that comes with fewer strings — and no acrid smell of sulphur (or is that just tar and nicotine?).

  12. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    What Mr. Bacon hasn’t seemed to recognize is that the “research services” being conducted for Philip Morris are not typical contract services (product testing, etc.). Discovering early warning signs of lung disease is original research guaranteed to generate intellectual property and new knowledge that should be shared with the research community & the tax-paying public (since this is a public university) – not kept under wraps by Philip Morris. The fact that Trani suddenly remembered manuscripts were being written (he & Macrina both forgot about this in late May when the story came out? or did the alleged manuscripts appear out of thin air?) is not a good thing … Philip Morris could tell the authors to publish only those data that make cigarettes look less dangerous, for example. Yes, the agreement as signed allows just that sort of manipulation, which is pretty damn scary since the authors will be university researchers, not Philip Morris employees (although that is essentially what they are in this agreement).

  13. Don’t Fall For The Local Corporate Propaganda | Oregon Hill

    […] ongoing problems with the concept of disclosure. We have seen these previously with its coverage of VCU, Center Stage, and other matters, but more recently, Jason Roop of Style Magazine fame […]

Leave a Reply

Read More