| |
Printable
version|Email
this article
Previous
Page
 The
gags employed by Bonanno and Bichlbaum have academic roots, borne
lightly though Bichlbaum stresses. On their site they provide info and
links on precedents from Aristophanes through to the Situationists, but
they’re also happy enough with a simple laugh leading to greater
awareness on an issue. “It [The Yes Men] all evolved through accident
and inclination, – shrugs Bichlbaum, - When we try to look back now at
what might have influenced us it’s obvious that there are some
theoretical links. We both read French absurdism, Da-da-ism, Surrealism
in college or before. It’s obvious that some of the same concerns were
around back then, shortly before the second world war, in the case of
Da-da. At points when things have been falling apart in history people
have had some of the same reactions”.
The obvious question, from those reared on the
concepts of regulation and law and order, is: why haven’t the Yes Men
been put behind bars yet? Surely in the Bush era it’s impossible to get
away with the sort of the pranks that they have! “It’s not clear what’s
illegal in what we do, – laughs Bichlbaum, - and what isn’t. We’ve
asked a lot of lawyers, and usually before we do anything we ask some
lawyers what the possible consequences of our actions are. Generally
the answer is that they don’t know. Some respond ‘don’t do it, it’s too
dangerous’, and others have said ‘well, it probably won’t result in
anything too bad happening’, and we’ve followed the advice of the
latter, and gotten away with it [laughs]. It’s probably not
illegal. The real crimes are being committed by our targets, and those
are very real, demonstrable crimes. The ones that we’re committing are
victimless, and probably not even crimes”.
Do the Yes Men then wonder about their
effectiveness? The lukewarm response from the corporations targeted,
and the lack of legal action might suggest that there’s a lack of
concern on the part of the high and mighty (the WTO’s sternest response
to their impersonations so far have been to call them “deplorable”).
“It’s a good thing to worry about, and we do sometimes question how
effective we’re being, but the truth is that the lack of reaction is
probably showing the opposite, – Andy responds, explaining - There’s
this thing called a SLAPP suit in the United States – a strategic
litigation against public participation. It’s when activists target
companies in various ways, as happened with the McLibel case,
and companies take spurious law suits against them. The companies don’t
necessarily expect them to stand up in court, but it ties the activists
up in red tape. That’s the way the McLibel case began, and surprised
McDonalds by turning into a really big thing. In our case we’ve managed
to drum up enough media attention from any threats we’ve received to
make companies wary of attacking us in that way". For example George W.
Bush attempted to get their www.gwbush.com
site shut down, blundering in his own inimitable way “there ought to be
limits on freedom”, and in so doing created mountains of negative press
coverage. "The WTO have said this explicitly", confirms Bichlbaum,
"speaking to a journalist, who asked 'why don’t you go after these guys
in court?’, they said ‘ it will just get them more attention than
they’ve already got’.With the Bhopal thing – he continues - on the BBC,
it’s almost certain that Dow won’t come after us because they just
don’t want any association between Dow and Bhopal in the same sentence,
anywhere".
The Bhopal stunt could well be considered the
high point of the Yes Men’s career (though subsequent to the film) to
date, when Bichlbaum, in the person of "Jude Finisterra", spokesperson
supposedly for Dow Chemicals, managed to announce live on BBC that Dow
had decided to take full responsibility for the Bhopal disaster, and
were committed to providing full compensation and medical costs to the
survivors, along with a full clean up of the toxic area. Quite an about
turn for a company that had previously denied any responsibility for
the disaster, and which had termed a derisory $500 compensation package
per survivor as “plenty good for an Indian”.
Over 16,000 people died in Bhopal when a Union
Carbide plant released methyl isocyanate gas into the air, while,
through cost cutting measures, various safety and alert systems had
been disabled. Dow Chemicals bought Union Carbide in 2001, claiming, as
it continues to do, that it bears no legal responsibility for the
Bhopal disaster. Legal experts disagree, and there are various
outstanding criminal actions underway, both in India and in the US.
Conditions in Bhopal continue to be extremely hazardous to locals. When
Finisterra’s statement was read on the BBC, and picked up by various
other news organisations, Dow’s shares dropped, losing 2 billion
dollars on the German stock market, before rebounding later that day as
the hoax became apparent. The cautious press release
issued by Dow seems to back up Bichlbaum’s guess, that legal action is
the last thing Dow wish to engage in, where Bhopal will be once again
brought back to the public’s attention.
|
