Thanks for the example from the documentary: > They first identify all of the effective activists. They then offer them extremely well-paying jobs, either inte

Thanks for the example from the documentary: > They first identify all of the effective activists. They then offer them extremely well-paying jobs, either internal (head of environmental stewardship or something), or external by financing an e.g. people for sustainable development of the Bingbong Valley. From my gut feeling, I have difficulties believing that this will work: any serious/effective/annoying activist will stay a thorn in the flesh of the company, even in this new position. He will likely use the new money and influence to make make the resistance even more effective (just not by doing a frontal attack onto the financial source). In other words: to me, this rather sounds like a way the company drinking the poison on its own, so that activists don't put the poison in their drinks.