Brilliant retort to criticism of Gates Foundation

Michael Bisesi puts a skewer to The Lancet

Michael Bisesi of The Seattle Times wrote a very powerful response to what he described as "a venerable British medical journal ...(that) published an article criticizing the Gates Foundation global-health program on issues ranging from accountability to influence ["Lancet article critical of Gates giving," by Kristi Heim and Sandi Doughton, The Seattle Times, May 9)."

These lines resonated powerfully with me:

"The fact that Gates funding in global health nearly equals that of the World Health Organization says more about the priorities of wealthy nations and the WHO. The real question should be why wealthy nations have not increased funding for the WHO."

"Philanthropy is intended to set agendas and influence policy."

"Philanthropy is a public trust in private hands involving private action for the public good."

"Philanthropy and the nonprofit sector flourished in the United States for...two issues-related 'failures': government failure (inability to mobilize electoral or legislative majorities) and market failure (inability to make a profit). The Lancet could make a real contribution by exploring the causes and cures of those failures as they pertain to global health."

Sounds a lot like Phil Cubeta of GiftHub.

I strongly encourage you to read the full piece here:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2009212592_opinb13bisesi.html

What do you think?

[where: 75223]