Regarding your article "Motive behind documentary in question," (April 2, Page 1) for the American Chemistry Council to call the report "grossly inaccurate" and unfair only points out how trade groups and companies don't know how to react when they perceive that they're being fairly or unfairly singled out for abuse. Instead of giving a clear, concise response to the accusations, the industry hacks whined that they hadn't been given enough time to respond adequately.
They attacked the accusatory data with marshmallows of no substance. They ignored the documents they were being pilloried with. Instead, they launched into an obviously canned response that answered nothing and explained even less.
I tried not to pick sides as I watched the program, but the industry representatives made it too easy. They could have been campaigning for Mom and apple pie and they wouldn't have gotten my vote.
As to Bill Moyers being president of a foundation "that has given out hundreds of thousands of dollars in the last four years to environmental groups," why didn't the ACC reps explore this area? Seems to me they were very ill-prepared or very lazy. Shame on the ACC for its attempt to mislead us when it had a forum to accomplish so much good for our industry. Moyers is no Sinclair Lewis, but the ACC is making it too easy for him.
Performance Plastics Inc.