3 ms·

This is an interesting article, though I have on issue: Ida Tarbell's claims have since been discredited. Her father was put out of business by Rockefeller, and

This is an interesting article, though I have on issue: Ida Tarbell's claims have since been discredited. Her father was put out of business by Rockefeller, and as Rockefeller hardly ever gave interviews or opened up to anyone, she was free to craft the message she wanted.

dredmorbius 13y ago
The Tarbell family history is hardly unknown, and was, if I understand, known to McClure's at the time she wrote it. It's certainly part of Yergin's The Prize (itself a largely sympathetic history of the oil industry) in both the book and video. You'll find her family's history detailed on page 86 of Yergin's work (trade paper). Tarbell was a highly regarded journalist, she did extensive research on the Rockefellers. I'm not aware of any specific inaccuracies in her story. Just because someone has a personal tie to a story doesn't mean their reporting is in error, and unless you've got specifics regarding inaccuracies, I find your statements without basis.
- ameister14 13y ago
  Sure. The main thing is not what Rockefeller did, but what prompted his actions and the people that he was up against. First, while describing them as simple, honest businessmen, she somehow forgot that her father and his compatriots firebombed Rockefeller's pipelines and production facilities, prompting a large part of his response. They would attempt to destroy his ability to do business, and he responded by driving them out of it. Second, she did extensive research on the Rockefellers, it's true, though she never actually interviewed them. Rockefeller Sr., in fact, refused to go to the press and refute most of her statements, and didn't let anyone else do it for him. So, you only get one side. I don't think it's good journalism to portray a large corporation as evil and its competition as good simply by virtue of size. She didn't actually show that the independent producers were innocent in this, merely that they lost. She then would wax poetic about the noble nature of their business ownership, and how Rockefeller was attempting to destroy and pervert that nobility. It's kind of like how Native Americans were portrayed up till the 1970's; they were savage, and we were noble. Not really true, though much of what they were accused of doing was accurate. Now, we know that Rockefeller would offer stock or cash for the ownership of these refineries or fields, and we also know that the stock or cash offering would almost always be far more than it was worth. Further, the railroad companies accused of colluding with Rockefeller would routinely gouge him; it's why he built pipelines in the first place. He built a monopoly. That's true. It's also true that it drove down costs to 5% of the initial cost of Kerosene when he started. He ruthlessly crushed his competition and he definitely engaged in what are currently illegal business practices. It's just her portrayal of him as the villain and her father's compatriots as noble american heroes I take issue with.
  - dredmorbius 13y ago
    she somehow forgot that her father and his compatriots firebombed Rockefeller's pipelines and production facilities, prompting a large part of his response Citation needed.
    - ameister14 13y ago
      http://www.amazon.com/Titan-The-Life-John-Rockefeller/dp/1400077303 http://www.amazon.com/Titan-The-Life-John-Rockefeller/dp/140...
      - dredmorbius 13y ago
        Thanks. Doesn't immediately support your claims though I may look at the book.

dredmorbius 13y ago

The Tarbell family history is hardly unknown, and was, if I understand, known to McClure's at the time she wrote it. It's certainly part of Yergin's The Prize (itself a largely sympathetic history of the oil industry) in both the book and video. You'll find her family's history detailed on page 86 of Yergin's work (trade paper). Tarbell was a highly regarded journalist, she did extensive research on the Rockefellers. I'm not aware of any specific inaccuracies in her story. Just because someone has a personal tie to a story doesn't mean their reporting is in error, and unless you've got specifics regarding inaccuracies, I find your statements without basis.

ameister14 13y ago
Sure. The main thing is not what Rockefeller did, but what prompted his actions and the people that he was up against. First, while describing them as simple, honest businessmen, she somehow forgot that her father and his compatriots firebombed Rockefeller's pipelines and production facilities, prompting a large part of his response. They would attempt to destroy his ability to do business, and he responded by driving them out of it. Second, she did extensive research on the Rockefellers, it's true, though she never actually interviewed them. Rockefeller Sr., in fact, refused to go to the press and refute most of her statements, and didn't let anyone else do it for him. So, you only get one side. I don't think it's good journalism to portray a large corporation as evil and its competition as good simply by virtue of size. She didn't actually show that the independent producers were innocent in this, merely that they lost. She then would wax poetic about the noble nature of their business ownership, and how Rockefeller was attempting to destroy and pervert that nobility. It's kind of like how Native Americans were portrayed up till the 1970's; they were savage, and we were noble. Not really true, though much of what they were accused of doing was accurate. Now, we know that Rockefeller would offer stock or cash for the ownership of these refineries or fields, and we also know that the stock or cash offering would almost always be far more than it was worth. Further, the railroad companies accused of colluding with Rockefeller would routinely gouge him; it's why he built pipelines in the first place. He built a monopoly. That's true. It's also true that it drove down costs to 5% of the initial cost of Kerosene when he started. He ruthlessly crushed his competition and he definitely engaged in what are currently illegal business practices. It's just her portrayal of him as the villain and her father's compatriots as noble american heroes I take issue with.
- dredmorbius 13y ago
  she somehow forgot that her father and his compatriots firebombed Rockefeller's pipelines and production facilities, prompting a large part of his response Citation needed.
  - ameister14 13y ago
    http://www.amazon.com/Titan-The-Life-John-Rockefeller/dp/1400077303 http://www.amazon.com/Titan-The-Life-John-Rockefeller/dp/140...
    - dredmorbius 13y ago
      Thanks. Doesn't immediately support your claims though I may look at the book.