Merck Told to ‘Come Clean’ About COVID Censorship Collusion w/ Gov’t

On Tuesday, National Legal and Policy Center presented a “Government Censorship Transparency Report” proposal at Merck & Co., Inc.’s annual shareholder meeting that would require the company to produce a report that discloses its policy in response to governments’ requests to aid and abet censorship.

The company’s board of directors opposed our proposal, as explained on page 93 of its proxy statement.

Speaking as sponsor of the proposal was Paul Chesser, director of NLPC’s Corporate Integrity Project. A transcript of his three-minute remarks, which you can listen to here, follows:

Congressman Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has got some goods on Merck.

 

Last July, Chairman Jordan notified Robert Davis (pictured above), Chairman and CEO of Merck, that his committee had documents in its possession that showed in late 2020 that Merck was among the major pharmaceutical company invitees for a meeting with executive branch agencies, social media companies, and Stanford University.

 

The purpose of this meeting was to strategize how to shut down speech on the Internet that didn’t follow the government-driven, and pharma-driven, narratives on COVID.

 

Just a few months before this meeting took place, Merck announced in a press release about how proud it was of its so-called “responsibility” to be a “force for good in the world.”

 

The Company said in that press release that “we are calling on social media companies to do as much as they can to stop hate speech, racism and discrimination, and to create social media platforms that encourage sharing of accurate information.”

 

So there you go – out of the mouthpiece of this arrogant company, which likes to throw its weight around as a so-called “force for good,” is its clear commitment to shut down the speech of law-abiding, respectable Americans who may disagree with Merck’s agenda.

 

Mr. Davis, I certainly hope that you complied with Chairman Jordan’s request for further documents related to this organized scheme.

 

Because Merck’s response in opposition to our proposal does not instill confidence that you did.

 

Our proposal asks for a transparency report that outlines Merck’s policy in response to requests from government to help censor Americans.

 

The proposal also asks Merck to disclose the specific requests it has received from the government to aid censorship.

 

But rather than actually be transparent, Merck states that it “already provides significant disclosure regarding its ongoing efforts to increase transparency.”

 

This is an absolute, total falsehood – but then again, the public has come to expect nothing but propaganda from Big Pharma.

 

Its trust and reputation is in tatters, just like Big Media’s, academia’s, and government’s.

 

Merck’s proxy response is an insult, and feebly attempts to distract investors from the censorship issue.

 

The Company tries to claim it is transparent by pointing to its already-required financial disclosures, and to irrelevancies like its “Carbon Disclosure Project.”

 

How are those pertinent to Merck’s participation in willful and unconstitutional government censorship that puts the company at legal risk?

 

Come clean, Mr. Davis. Come clean, Merck board. Please vote for Proposal 5.

You can view NLPC’s shareholder proposal for Merck & Co., Inc.’s annual meeting here.

Listen to Chesser’s delivered remarks in support of the proposal here.