Will a settlement hurt the arts?

0 Comments | Insight on the News, March 16, 1998 | by Gayle M.B. Hanson

Soul man Ray Charles has benefited. So has New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Houston Grand Opera and Chicago's Steppenwolf Theater. Avant-garde choreographers Mark Morris, Twyla Tharp and Bill T. Jones have pranced to its tune, as have such dance stalwarts as the Martha Graham Dance Company, the American Ballet Theater and the New York City Ballet. If that weren't cultural pedigree enough, in 1965 its pioneering underwriting of the Museum of Modern Art's groundbreaking Pop & Op show launched into stardom such well-regarded painters as Roy Lichtenstein, Jasper Johns and James Rosenquist. Today it continues its support of pioneering artists through grants to such institutions as the Brooklyn Academy of Music's NEXT WAVE festival and the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater.

It is Philip Morris Companies Inc., the self-described "world's largest consumer packed good company," which for 40 years has underwritten cultural, educational, and now nutritional initiatives through its corporate-grant programs. But, when it comes to giving out the details about its giving, the company is surprisingly silent.

"We are often asked why we don't want to blow our own horn," says K. Richmond Temple, director of communications for Philip Morris. "People always want to know the dollar amounts that we give. But we give as corporate citizens and prefer to keep the dollar amounts quiet. But we receive many, many more requests than we can fund."

What we do know about Philip Morris' funding of the arts is impressive. Since 1981, Philip Morris has provided more than $27 million in grants to American dance companies. In 1997, that funding included more than $1 million for the creation of new works.

Among the longstanding recipients of the company's largesse is the aforementioned Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater, one of the country's best-loved dance companies. Despite the current controversy about tobacco, the dance company stands loyally beside it's benefactor. "I feel that loyalty deserves loyalty," says Janine Veto, director of development for the company. "Philip has stood by us through some tough times, like when our founder died. It would not be honorable now that the pressure is on to distance ourselves from those who have been loyal."

In fact, no less a figure than J. Carter Brown, director emeritus of the National Gallery of Art in Washington, has championed the good will of tobacco to the arts. "Throughout its many year of arts patronage, Philip Morris has provided a bedrock of support to cultural organizations around the world," he says

While the Philip Morris logo has become a familiar imprint on all sorts of cultural programming, it also has engaged in a four-decade program of supporting education initiatives, including one called "Teachers First," which provides grants to recruit, train and support new teachers.

At the same time, the company has expanded its corporate giving to include hunger relief, which is not all that surprising considering it acquired both Kraft and General Foods during the late 1980s.

Since that time. Philip Morris has contributed more than $115 million to hunger relief, making it the largest corporate sponsor of hunger-relief efforts in America. While the largest share of that donation, $81 million, was in in-kind food contributions of Kraft Foods products, another $34 million went directly to nutrition programs.

"If we get other corporations to follow Philip Morris' tremendous lead -- as far as helping out and donating money to help the poor and hungry -- we're going to be able to solve this problem," said Robert L.E. Egger, director of the DC Central Kitchen, which has benefited from Philip Morris largesse.

The list goes on, and the recipients of the grants profess their gratitude. But what nobody is talking about, and what Philip Morris and other companies are reluctant to speak about in light of the pending legal settlement, is whether the proposed settlement will affect the company's pattern of giving.

"Actually, that is a very good question," says Temple. "But we are unable to address any issues regarding the proposed settlement at this time."