I think Nick answered all the objections to the questioning with class and dignity and a verbal kick in the butt for crass obfuscation tactics.

I wish the objectors would stick around and debate the logic of their argument to it’s bitter end, but probably not.

Again, very well done!

I trust that your written version here will be backed up by the video.

Too bad, nobody had to yell out, “Don’t taser me bro!” so that the video could go viral.

Be careful of asking the CEO’s about their Skull and Bones allegiances now!

This is how it is done fellas.

Let’s keep marchin toward a more compassionate truth till they can’t help but get in line, or at least stop heckling.

They will still get their ice cream and doughnuts in a less consumeristic and more democratic society, they should relax. Their Viagra wont go up that much.

Our level heads and compassionate awareness will win every time against the small-minded and greedy. It is all about greed isn’t it?

We are all aware of this, yes?

Greed and fear and old time religion are hard to overcome, but with compasson backed up by facts you can usually get people to at least listen.

This really made me happy as you can see.

Bravo!

If you think the activists understanding of the case was incomplete, what justifies the CEO of Chevron’s ignorance and/or inability to answer the questions?

Regarding you calling the folks raising concerns about Ecuador hypocrites. Where is the hypocrisy it asking a company to clean up a mess that it is responsible for? Now had Josh spilled some oil on the floor during the Q and A mixed it with your latte and then told you to drink it and clean it up yourself, well then yes that would have been hypocritical.

Finally your way off base on this "who’s responsible" argument. It is the company’s responsibility to be accountable to the communities it operates in; it is also their responsibility to clean up when they screw up. It is civil society's responsibility to hold them accountable to those communities and operations. Chevron has delayed this trail nearly 18 years to avoid accountability for the 18 billion gallons of toxic water they dumped and the 15 million gallons of crude they left in the rainforest. We are not responsible for that, but we are responsible to stand with the communities that are holding these companies accountable to their pollution.

MG – I hear your concerns for the appropriate venue, but respectfully disagree. I have no doubt it took a huge amount of coordination to bring the CEO of the 5th largest corporation on earth to your school. I think his attendance represents the respect the business world has for the Booth program. Regarding the venue, I think there is no more appropriate venue for these questions. John Watson was one of the main architects in the Chevron / Texaco merger he has a deep understanding of Chevron’s responsibility in Ecuador. Also, this lawsuit, if found liable, will certainly affect Chevron’s profits and concern shareholders, he would be irresponsible to not be preparing to be held accountable. In fact if I were a shareholder I would be concerned on his inability to answer these questions capably. I surprised more students were not interested as how Chevron was preparing to be held liable in the worlds largest environmental lawsuit. It will change how businesses operate internationally forever.

California- I have looked into the case and have followed it for awhile. I really like the “you can have your own opinion not your facts” I saw that on an MSNBC promo in the airport this morning. However, MSNBC aside, your right it’s about the “facts”, so lets explore the ones you brought up (you missed all 3)
First- Chevron bought Texaco with full knowledge of Texaco’s massive and intentional pollution in Ecuador. The suite was initially filed against Texaco, and then Chevron bought Texaco. Call the company what ever you would like (I call them words I can’t write here), but it’s the same company and they will be held liable for the operations they inherited.
Second- Chevron (then Texaco) was a partner with PetroEcaudor (40/60 to be exact) However Chevron was the 100% operator of the oil wells. Chevron is only one who build the pits, produced the oil, and left the toxic pollution in the communities. 100%
Third- The government may have released Chevron, but the 30,000 community members to whom this civil case was brought forth on behalf of have released Chevron of nothing. They have every right to be taking Chevron to court.

By the way, if Google purchased BP Google could be held liable to community members filing suites in the gulf. Remember that if you are ever brokering a merger, because either Watson skipped that class, or Chevron was arrogant enough to think they could get away with it.

Finally, I think that these folks were “fair, impartial, and educated”. It’s the very fact that they were all three that led to Watson’s embarrassment. Like you said "you can have his opinions but you can’t have the facts', and he certainly doesn't have the facts.

If you have any questions regarding the case I’m happy to direct you towards some resources. You can image how much info is out there in an 18 year old case.

Nick

Your argument would be similar to Google purchasing BP in 25 years and then Google being sued for the Gulf Oil Spill.

“activists” should also aim to be fair, impartial, and educated. Rather than attempt to embarrass others.

From Seoul, Korea,
MG