Insight on corporate misconduct
A radio show details how an infamous price-fixing case changed antitrust investigations.
July 31, 2011 at 08:00 PM
7 minute read
Almost every weekday, as I drive to and from work, I often take in an episode of This American Life on my TAL app. The hour-long radio show is a mix of true stories about everyday life, in-depth reports on newsworthy events, and short fiction. Each episode follows a theme, and episodes are broken into different acts, so you usually get a variety of programming in each show. But occasionally, a story is so interesting or complex, host Ira Glass dedicates an entire episode to one topic.
This week, as I was randomly choosing an episode, I stumbled upon “The Fix is In.” The entire episode covers a three-year period in the early 1990s in which Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) executive Mark Whitacre worked as an informant to the FBI in an effort to uncover a price-fixing scheme within his company. (The show caught the attention of director Steven Soderbergh after it originally aired in 2000, and he decided to make it into a movie—“The Informant!,” released in 2009.) It details how five companies, including ADM, colluded to drive up the price of lysine, an animal-feed additive. The episode included audio recordings of the corruption taking place, and interviews with FBI agents, prosecutors and Whitacre. It also details the extraordinary talent Whitacre had as an informant, as well as his ultimate downfall.
Although the case is nearly 20 years old, the lesson shouldn't be lost on any of us. In the end, ADM was fined $100 million for its misconduct—the largest antitrust fine at the time (in 1995) and 10 times more than any previous antitrust fine. But only four years later, ADM's fine was only the fifth largest. And in that time, the Justice Department had netted $1 billion in fines from other companies for antitrust violations.
“[The ADM case] changed how the antitrust division and the entire Justice Department viewed business conduct,” Federal Prosecutor Jim Mutchnik (now a partner at Kirkland & Ellis) told Glass in the broadcast, adding that Whitacre's role in the investigation played a large part in changing antitrust enforcement policy. According to Mutchnik, before the ADM scandal, it was rare for the antitrust division to conduct search warrants, use tape-recorded evidence and engage in confrontational interviews. But all that changed with Whitacre.
Regardless of whether you're familiar with the story, this insightful episode is worth your time—whether as a reminder of the prevalence of corporate misconduct or for pure entertainment. To listen to TAL's free podcast of this story, visit thisamericanlife.org.
Almost every weekday, as I drive to and from work, I often take in an episode of This American Life on my TAL app. The hour-long radio show is a mix of true stories about everyday life, in-depth reports on newsworthy events, and short fiction. Each episode follows a theme, and episodes are broken into different acts, so you usually get a variety of programming in each show. But occasionally, a story is so interesting or complex, host Ira Glass dedicates an entire episode to one topic.
This week, as I was randomly choosing an episode, I stumbled upon “The Fix is In.” The entire episode covers a three-year period in the early 1990s in which
Although the case is nearly 20 years old, the lesson shouldn't be lost on any of us. In the end, ADM was fined $100 million for its misconduct—the largest antitrust fine at the time (in 1995) and 10 times more than any previous antitrust fine. But only four years later, ADM's fine was only the fifth largest. And in that time, the Justice Department had netted $1 billion in fines from other companies for antitrust violations.
“[The ADM case] changed how the antitrust division and the entire Justice Department viewed business conduct,” Federal Prosecutor Jim Mutchnik (now a partner at
Regardless of whether you're familiar with the story, this insightful episode is worth your time—whether as a reminder of the prevalence of corporate misconduct or for pure entertainment. To listen to TAL's free podcast of this story, visit thisamericanlife.org.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllInside Track: Late-Career In-House Leaders Offer Words to Live by
'You Don't Know Everything': GCs Say Success Leading Nonlegal Functions Starts With Humility
5 minute readMarriott's $52M Data Breach Settlement Points to Emerging Trend
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan and Irell & Manella have stepped in to defend Foresight Diagnostics in a pending trade secrets lawsuit. The action, which is sealed, was filed Aug. 29 in California Northern District Court by Richards, Layton & Finger and Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Eumi K. Lee, is 5:24-cv-06117, Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. et al v. Foresight Diagnostics Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
David A. Robinson, John F. Wood and Brendan H. Connors from Holland & Knight and attorneys from Proskauer Rose have entered appearances for Scientific Drilling International, S. Westley Shedd, Pamela Pierce and other defendants, respectively, in a pending shareholder lawsuit. The suit was filed Aug. 29 in California Central District Court by Umhofer, Mitchell & King on behalf of Matthew D. Van Steenwyk and Gretchen M. Van Steenwyk-Marsh. The suit accuses the controlling shareholder of Scientific Drilling of self-dealing. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha, is 2:24-cv-07401, Matthew D. Van Steenwyk et al v. Kedrin E. Van Steenwyk et al.
Who Got The Work
Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete partners Laura A. Balson and Ashley L. Orler have entered appearances for Avfuel Corporation in a pending data breach class action. The case, filed Aug. 30 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Kopelowitz Ostrow PA, centers on a 2024 cyberattack that allegedly exposed the personally identifying and private data of 'potentially billions of individuals.' The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Mark A. Goldsmith, is 2:24-cv-12274, Clark III v. Avfuel Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Stephanie Lamerce of Duane Morris has entered an appearance for MillerKnoll, the Michigan-based furniture company formerly known as Herman Miller, in a pending website accessibility class action. The complaint, filed Aug. 30 in New York Eastern District Court by Stein Saks, contends that the defendant's website is inaccessible to screen readers and denies full access to blind and visually-impaired individuals. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Cheryl L. Pollak, is 1:24-cv-06106, Hernandez v. Millerknoll, Inc.
Who Got The Work
General Motors has turned to attorney Nancy D. Green of Ricci Tyrrell Johnson & Grey to defend a pending breach-of-warranty lawsuit. The case, for claims under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, was filed Aug. 30 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by the Lemon Law Group Partners on behalf of the purchaser of a new 2022 GMC Sierra 1500 vehicle. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey L. Schmehl, is 5:24-cv-04595, Fey v General Motors LLC.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250