While I admire Tom Philpott's work at Grist in general (love Victual Reality), reading a 2800 word opinion piece on the evil giant that is Archer Daniels Midland was not what I expected when I set out to read the article.  

I'd love to think ADM was a corporate evildoer--I basically already think that--but this story didn't expand my horizons on that front, because I'm not sure I can trust it. As a journalist, Philpott's job is to conduct interviews, get multiple angles on the story, and craft a narrative out of that.  This story read as though he spent a long time reading leftist books on corporate scandals and then wrote a piece on ADM and ethanol.  I don't doubt most of it is true, but I'd like to see the opinions of historians, policy analysts, and of course, the company itself--then I could actually trust the story, rather than thinking to myself, "oh, I just read a nice long piece of opinion journalism by Philpott, but how I am really supposed to know that this is the most complete synthesis of the story, since he cites hardly no one and hasn't conducted any interviews with experts, let alone the company itself."

I'd love to see good quality muckraking journalism on ADM--but this isn't it.

As a journalist, Philpott's job is to conduct interviews, get multiple angles on the story, and craft a narrative out of that.

That format you describe is what you will find in newspapers and on television--short, watered down, inaccurate, "balanced" entertainment for the masses tailored not to offend subscribers or advertisers. If it is entertainment you are after, stick to your newspapers. If you are looking for tons of data presented in an extensive, well-written format (including six internet links), complete with intelligent well-defended critique from a writer who knows the subject intimately, well, you're here.

Interviews are certainly not necessary in today's data rich (internet accessible) world. An interview is a really inefficient place to mine for data and certainly, such data carries no guarantee of validity. What value does the opinion of an interviewee have, especially one of a corporate representative?

You lost me when you said you are not sure you can trust the article. What exactly do you mean? A list of citations at the end of the article isn't usually done here, but I'm sure one could be provided. When was the last time you read a newspaper article with citations and footnotes? Tom's opinions are easy to parse out from facts, and agreeing with all of them is not a prerequisite for reading the article. By the way, ADM isn't evil. It is just a very successful business that has maximized profit at the expense of the environment and has plans in place to continue to utilize government subsidies to further a game plan that has proven immensely profitable in the past. Tom's "clearly" biased articles do a fantastic job of educating us on this topic and he does so without trying to convince the reader that he has no strong opinion on the subject. You know exactly where he stands and why.

So, this person is responsible for the precipitous rise in obesity, heart problems and diabetes in America, but somehow "Grist" wants to make him into an eco-superhero because he uses a few percentage points of his wealth for charity?

Wow -- who funds Grist anyway?  The Apologists for Rich Bastards Who Like to Toss the Plebes Some Bread and Circuses Every Now and Then?

Actually that is an oxymoron.

i highly recommend the book "Rats in the Grain" as a tutorial on corporate ethics in general and ADMs in particular.

  it is a losing battle people.  

see my recomendation just posted.