This is a must-read article by Linsey McGoey in Jacobin magazine about the big foundations–especially Gates–and how they use their alms for for-profit companies and start-ups.
McGoey of the University of Essex has written a book on the influence wielded by Gates and other big philanthropies. It’s title: “No Such Thing as a Free Gift: The Gates Foundation and the Price of Philanthropy” (Verso).
“In 2010, the Gates Foundation offered $1.5 million to ABC News and a little over $1.1 million to NBC in 2011 “to support the national education summit.” The following year, the Gates Foundation gave another million to NBC, this time for the more vague purpose of “inform[ing] and engag[ing] communities.” Other for-profit media companies receiving Gates Foundation money in 2012 included Univision — a Spanish language broadcaster whose parent company, Univision Communications pulled in revenues of $2.6 billion in 2014.
“Traditionally, philanthropic grants to for-profits were rare, but this is no longer the case. The Gates Foundation has offered dozens of grants to for-profit companies around the world, including beneficiaries poised to profit from the Common Core standards…
“Indeed, the Gates Foundation makes similar donations all the time. Scholastic, a company that, like Pearson, is a for-profit education publisher, has received over $6 million in grant money from the foundation. A November 2011 grant of $4,463,541 was designed to support “teachers’ implementation of the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics.”
“What’s not clear is why this counts as charity. Doesn’t Scholastic stand to gain from the expansion of textbook and testing materials accompanying the Common Core standards?”
She goes on to describe other for-profits that Gates has supported, such as Tutor.com.
“Indeed, numerous for-profit education start-ups are indebted to the foundation. Another example, BetterLesson Inc., billed as the “Facebook for educators,” circulates free online lesson plans to teachers but charges schools a service fee. It has received over $3.5 million in grant money from the Gates Foundation. BetterLesson may well prove to be a useful tool for teachers.
“But it also charges a premium for that service — a cost borne by taxpayer-funded public education institutions. At a time of growing anger over dwindling educational resources in public schools, at a time when extreme poverty is on the rise in the United States — does yet another tech start-up deserve Gates’ charity?….
“Contrary to the conventional wealth-creation narrative, large multinationals are increasingly assuming less financial risk when it comes to investing their own capital — even as they reap excessive financial rewards by exploiting subsidies from the public sector and philanthropic foundations. Companies like Mastercard are just as bullish and self-satisfied about the charity they receive as the charity they give away.
“But challenging the new corporate charity claimants will not, alone, mitigate the unrivalled power of large philanthropic funders to frame the terms of debate in the fields of education, health and global poverty or shape the policies of institutions such as the WHO.
“Over a century ago, when Andrew Carnegie published his first “Wealth” essay suggesting that private philanthropy would solve the problem of rich and poor, he was met with fierce rebuke. “I can conceive of no greater mistake,” commented William Jewett Tucker, a theologian who went on to become president of Dartmouth College, “than that of trying to make charity do the work of justice.”
“Today’s philanthrocrats share Carnegie’s gospel of wealth. To take back the mantle of justice and equality, the Left must delegitimize private foundations and refute the centrality of charity in solving the world’s most pressing problems.”

“Oh my, ugh, and sad,” is all I can say. The GENE GREED is well and alive.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
LikeLike
The irony here is just too thick (new gospel of…)
The “new” snake goes by the name of Gates. Same game, different name.
Step right up critters and feast on the fruit of the “knowledge” tree…
LikeLike
“But the the role of foundations is evolving rapidly and soon it may seem odd that charity was once designated for those living in poverty; those who have no housing; those fleeing situations of domestic abuse; those reliant on food banks; those bankrupted by skyrocketing medical bills, and not to a multinational company taking a taxpayer-funded bet on the idea that what the poor really need is a new credit card.”
LikeLike
“Legacies”
The legacy of Carnegie
Is libraries inspiring
The legacy of Gates, we see
Is testing, VAMs and firing
LikeLike
This is not huge news if you have done searches at the Gates foundation website. The foundations are just providing capital for entrepreneurs and profit-seekers whose views and projects comport with the mission of their foundations.
Gates selects topics and programs he wants pushed, then pays shills/promoters to get in line. His workforce on foundation projects includes an army of people and once independent organizations who are eager for the hand-out.
Among these are a host of once independent voices and whistleblowers who might have put a STOP on his mega-maniacal need to get data on every child, parent, teacher, principal, teacher educator; to control the policies at the USDE as if he is the Secretary of Education; and to enlist his billionaire friends with foundation assets to contribute to his grand experiments in seeking “outcomes” by any means necessary.
He is dangerous because he, like many billionaires, are hostile to any hint of democratic decision making.
If you have projects that comport with Gates flavor of the month reform or general objective of privatizing social and educational services, then he and his staff will find you and give you money. Recent grants have gone to for-profit game designers to make more appealing algebra courses, to for-profit centers that will rate some new teacher education programs, and to all sorts of news organizations, and civil rights groups. He thinks he can buy anything, and a lot of people who should know better are proving he can do just that
LikeLike
I am sure that one of the reasons he is avidly pursuing education is that he sees lots of opportunity for ROI, particularly in the use of computers for CAI (computer assisted instruction) and testing. He is more motivated by economic gain than altruism.
LikeLike
Bill Gates is guilty of illegally experimenting on children.
LikeLike
Let’s not forget the Gates Foundation funding of NPR education “reporting.”
Perhaps some readers saw this Eric Westervelt piece at NPR on October 28 titled “Will STEM Education Be the Child Left Behind?”
http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2015/10/28/451194296/will-stem-education-be-the-child-left-behind
The comment below was left at NPR – and deleted by NPR – three times.
____________________________________________________________
Sigh. Big, big sigh.
Either Eric Westervelt didn’t do his journalistic homework or he deliberately misreported the truth about STEM. Neither is encouraging. Either one undermines his credibility.
Westervelt cites the both the national math and science initiative and the STEM Education Coalition (STEMEC) to make the argument that STEM is “critically important” to the nation’s well-being.
The National Math and Science Initiative’s (NMSI) board of directors includes Exxon Mobil VP for public and government affairs Ken Cohen, former Lockheed Martin CEO Norm Augustine (who says STEM education is vital to the “future of our economy”), Current Lockheed VP Ray Johnson, and David Coleman (of the Common Core and the College Board). NMSI funders include the Gates Foundation (which funded the Common Core), Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, the very conservative Dell and O’Donnell and Perot Foundations, the College Board, Boeing, JP Morgan Chase, and Exxon Mobil.
Exxon Mobil is a corporate behemoth, quite profitable. It’s also a tax scofflaw, a big polluter, a member and active participant in the right-wing shenanigans of ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council), and a prolific funder of global warming and climate change denial.
STEMEC’s leadership council – and presumably its funders – includes Microsoft, ExxonMobil, ETS (Educational Testing Service, which administers tests for the College Board), and the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM).
The National Association of Manufacturers has a long, long history of opposing unionization and workers’ rights. Its primary mission is to “ to enhance the competitiveness of manufacturers by shaping a legislative and regulatory environment…” And that means cheap labor, more corporate tax cuts, and very few regulations. The NAM supported the Bush tax cuts in 2001, sending out a memo for its lobbyists and members to rally on Capitol Hill disguised as “REAL WORKER types.” To facilitate the fraud, NAM provided “hard hats for people to wear.” The NAM refuses to recognize the problems caused by global warming and climate change, but it somehow knows how to improve math and science education?
On its website, the STEM Education Coalition – just like the National Math and Science Initiative – says STEM is crucial to American “competitiveness and future economic prosperity.” It says that STEM is vital to make the U.S. “innovative, secure and competitive.” But it’s not true.
The World Economic Forum evaluates and ranks countries on economic competitiveness each year. The U.S. is usually in the top five (if not 1 or 2). When it drops, the WEF cites stupid economic decisions and policies. For example, when the U.S. dropped from 2nd to 4th in 2010-11, four factors were cited by the WEF for the decline: (1) weak corporate auditing and reporting standards, (2) suspect corporate ethics, (3) big deficits brought on by Wall Street’s financial implosion and (4) unsustainable levels of debt. Guess who supported all policies that caused the decline in competitiveness?
In the last two years, the U.S. has moved up to 5th, and 3rd place. Why? The WEF noted that “the deficit is narrowing for the first time since the onset of the financial crisis.” It pointed out that “An economy is well served by businesses that are run honestly, where managers abide by strong ethical practices in their dealings with the government…and the public at large.” It noted that “the macroeconomic environment remains the country’s greatest area of weakness.”
So, guess who has opposed nearly all the policies that led to the reduced deficit, and who insists on more top-down tax cuts that undermine macroeconomic stability?
Eric Westervelt writes that “American companies regularly voice concern about the under-supply of qualified STEM workers.” He says that the STEM jobs are increasing at a rate faster than increasing faster than “overall employment growth.” But that’s a canard.
A 2004 RAND study “found no consistent and convincing evidence that the federal government faces current or impending shortages of STEM workers…there is little evidence of such shortages in the past decade or on the horizon.” The RAND study concluded “if the number of STEM positions or their attractiveness is not also increasing” –– and both are not –– then “measures to increase the number of STEM workers may create surpluses, manifested in unemployment and underemployment.”
A 2007 study by Lowell and Salzman found no STEM shortage. Indeed, Lowell and Salzman found that “the supply of S&E-qualified graduates is large and ranks among the best internationally. Further, the number of undergraduates completing S&E studies has grown, and the number of S&E graduates remains high by historical standards.” The “education system produces qualified graduates far in excess of demand.”
Beryl Lieff Benderly wrote this stunning statement fairly recently in the Columbia Journalism Review:
“Leading experts on the STEM workforce, have said for years that the US produces ample numbers of excellent science students. In fact…the country turns out three times as many STEM degrees as the economy can absorb into jobs related to their majors.”
So why the STEM emphasis?
Benderly continues:
“Simply put, a desire for cheap, skilled labor, within the business world and academia, has fueled assertions—based on flimsy and distorted evidence—that American students lack the interest and ability to pursue careers in science and engineering, and has spurred policies that have flooded the market with foreign STEM workers. This has created a grim reality for the scientific and technical labor force: glutted job markets; few career jobs; low pay, long hours, and dismal job prospects for postdoctoral researchers in university labs; near indentured servitude for holders of temporary work visas.”
Michael Teitelbaum summed up the STEM nonsense well in The Atlantic: “The truth is that there is little credible evidence of the claimed widespread shortages in the U.S. science and engineering workforce.”
Teitelbaum added this: “A compelling body of research is now available, from many leading academic researchers and from respected research organizations such as the National Bureau of Economic Research, the RAND Corporation, and the Urban Institute. No one has been able to find any evidence indicating current widespread labor market shortages or hiring difficulties in science and engineering occupations that require bachelors degrees or higher…All have concluded that U.S. higher education produces far more science and engineering graduates annually than there are S&E job openings—the only disagreement is whether it is 100 percent or 200 percent more.”
Moreover, a look at the number of new jobs forecast for 2012-2022 by the National Bureau of Labor Statistics yields the same kind of information. Except for RNs, most of the projected new jobs do not require a college education. The occupations cited for most new job growth are personal care aides, retail sales, home health aides, food preparers and servers, customer service reps, nursing assistants, janitors and cleaners, construction laborers, freight laborers and movers, carpenters, bookkeepers, truck drivers, secretaries and clerks, childcare workers, maids, and LPNs.
Meanwhile, in the high-tech area, “Even in electrical and electronic engineering—an occupation that is right at the heart of high-tech innovation but that also has been heavily outsourced abroad—U.S. employment in 2013 declined to about 300,000, down 35,000 and over 10 percent, from 2012, and down from about 385,000 in 2002. Unemployment rates for electrical engineers rose to a surprisingly high 4.8 percent in 2013.”
This STEM focus may be trendy, but it is based on a fallacy. It’s a myth. And acting on myths –– like weapons of mass destruction in Iraq or supply-side tax cuts–– can be dangerous folly. And, guess who gets to pay for it?
Readers deserve better from Eric Westervelt, and from NPR.
So does public education.
LikeLike
“Read between the radio waves”
“Read between the radio waves”
To fathom NPR
Gates Foundation pays their ways
And keeps them in a jar
LikeLike
The funny thing is that that comment was much better researched than the vast majority of the stuff produced at NPR.
NPR hires people who couldn’t get a job doing real journalism if their very life depended on it.
These folks are the Duncan Kruger effect epitomized: they think they know it all and their reports are literally dripping with condescension for anyone who is not blessed with their infinite wisdom.
LikeLike
>The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias wherein relatively unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability to be much higher than is accurate. Dunning and Kruger attributed this bias to a meta-cognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their own ineptitude and evaluate their own ability accurately.<
This describes virtually every so-called education reformer we have encountered. Fauxperts and edu-fakers, all of them.
LikeLike
Did I write Duncan Kruger?
I’m sorry. I meant “Dunning Kruger”. I always get confused between the two.
“National Parrot Radio”
Dunning-Kruger epitomized
NPR has corporate ties
Makes reparroters squawk and squeak
Every time they go to speak
LikeLike
I am disgusted with NPR! I was listening Friday afternoon (http://wamc.org/post/best-our-knowledge-1312) and the segment was about food insecurity/sustainable agriculture etc and the speaker in the first part of the segment was from the Cornell Alliance for Science. So much of what she was saying about GMOS and agriculture was familiar to me…it seemed to echo the rhetoric of the Gates education reform agenda. I heard the words “robust and “rigorous” and thought where have I heard this before? When the presenter asked the Head of the Alliance for Science if she was a paid shill from Monsanto or another pro GMO company she said that she didn’t ever take a dime from any industray; that her work was grant based. Well, guess who funds the Cornell Alliance for Science and the 25 “international FEllows” they are sponsoring ? Yes, that would be the GATES FOUNDATION! AND SURPRISE SURPRISE, Gates own $23,000,000 or roughly 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock. Thankfully the rest of the segment addressed concerns that farmers have, especially in Africa, about AGRA, ( another Gates funded initiative) which is rewriting agri-culture into agri-business, seeking to open African markets and eliminate local decision making and patent all seeds, etc.
THis “philanthropist” has his hand everywhere and has bought his way in; it’s influence peddling reminiscent of the way organized crime spread money to corrupt….
LikeLike
“The Duncan-Kruger Effect”
The Duncan-Kruger Effect
Is rife with school “reform”
Where thinking has been checked
And chutzpah is the norm
LikeLike
Thank you for posting…lots of good evidence of which I was fully aware existed, just not in a nice concise format.
LikeLike
Excellent corrective but deleted by NPR
LikeLike
And yet we fight on to save public education. Sometimes it seems insurmountable but then I read references to past history like the debate Carnegie started and somehow that strengthens my resolve.
LikeLike
“Foilanthropy”
The billionaire’s foilanthropy
Subverts and foils democracy
It circumvents the people’s voice
Replacing it with wealthy choice
LikeLike
Malanthropy (N): the use of taxpayer-subsidized “non-profit” vehicles to create, advocate for and implement policies that are of direct financial and political benefit to oneself and one’s class.
LikeLike
Surprising- a charitable deduction for the grant that the Gates Foundation’s gave to the Chamber of Commerce. And, more surprising, the number of public universities that are writing checks to the Chamber, an organization that advocates for policies that have enabled U.S. concentration of wealth, by outsourcing and denying the rewards of labor’s productivity, to workers-whose children attend to those universities.
….But, no congressional hearings and, no Politico and Time reporting
LikeLike
And here in L.A., we have billionaire Eli Broad donating money to the L.A.Times, owned by a media corporation based in Chicago, to fund the salaries of education reporters.
LikeLike