A rapidly emerging issue for media conglomerates is the tobacco content of their motion pictures marketed to young people. The tobacco and film industries have a long, documented history of marketing collaboration. Sony (Columbia) currently has one of the gravest impacts, yet has no known policy to reduce kids’ exposure to imagery that, according to the National Cancer Institute, causes teens to become smokers.

Intro to this issue at this University of California web site: http:smokefreemovies.ucsf.edu.

Thanks for your provocative list.

Pollution is wasted resources. If an enterprise recycles and reuses, then it can become environmentally benign or at least start the long trek towards that goal of perfection.

Please read my article: http://www.wesnetindia.org/fileadmin/newsletter_pdf/Aug06/Waste_Management.pdf

The key enabling technology is from India: http://www.wastetohealth.com/

Let’s save the oil and gas we have to make things. And be smarter about the methods we use to produce energy. We only have so much to work with.

I think I didn’t phrase myself well enough here. What I would like to see is a “Least accountable Top 10.” Tell the public what Fortune 100 companies are doing that damages the planet. Preferably compared to other companies in their sector who are making an effort to be “green”. There’s nothing like a healthy dose of negative publicity to get a company’s attention.

How does using Green energy make a company accountable?

I do not care about corporate accountability. Corporations do not owe anything to anyone. They are in existence simply to provide goods and services to paying customers. Any incentive or charitable gift they give is done just for the heck of it. The environment is only the government’s responsibilty, not citizens and corporations. As long as a company is profitable, they are totally accountable.

If you guys have problems with oil companies and car companies, you should not use gasoline or drive cars. I see that none of you have any solutions to the “problems” that these companies cause. This is because these companies do not cause problems. Auto and oil companies directly and indirectly provide the human race with energy, food, clothing, shelter and opportunities for advancement.

I bet that none of you that are complaining really care about the environment. If a new SUV, truck, or car was $5,000-$7,500 or if gas was $1.00-$1.70 a gallon, you would have no complaints. Stop giving in to the trend of ‘going green’. The environment is not in a bad condition. You all are only up in arms because you have seen so many news reports on environmentalism.

American corporations can do no wrong as long as they are profitable.

Please reconcile how the BP attempts to increase their toxic dumping into Lake Michigan this summer factor into your #1 ranking. No mention of it in the article means 1) you did not know of it; or 2) you knew of it and thought it a small issue. Or perhaps, (hopefully) there is a reasonable #3 answer.

However, some objectivity has been provided by other posts.

The bottom line is there are companies that are in the business of providing goods that are, unfortunately, negatively impacting our world. Because of the nature of their business does not disqualify them from inclusion.

Also, considering what they do and the volume in which they conduct their business, the law of averages will produce some incidents. Now, I’m not agreeing that they can do better, but understanding the nature of these companies businesses is a consideration of their CSR.