Sent: 3/20/2017 9:08:39 AM To: MURPHEY, SAMUEL ADMINISTRATIVE GROUP Subject: FW: In advance for our call this afternoon From: Sent: Monda March 20, 2017 11:57 AM SubJec a vance for our call this afternoon Dear All, In preparation for our call this afternoon, please find below an update report following Le Monde?s article published on Saturday morning dealing with the Monsanto Papers? issue. Total: 7 clippings 2 clippings radio: 0 BFM Business (Tier 1; neutral), March 18th (morning news: 3 times at 8,9 and 10am) The reportjust mentions that Monsanto knows since 1999 the mutagenic potential of substance of its flagship product, the Roundup. 0 Sud Radio (Tier 2; negative), March 20th (morning news 7.40am) The report says the dangerousness of Roundup aiias is known by Monsanto since 1999, the journalist mentions also the new report of ECHA and states that this report is positive while the evidence is piling up to prove the substance is carcinogenic, for 20 years. - 5 clippings web (3 Tier 1 articles 2 Tier 2 articles): 0 ta: Manage: (Tier 1), March 18th 0 to Parisian (Tier 1), March 18Lh This article quotes Le Monde?s article but also the New York Times? one, underlining that Monsanto tried to influence the research work of scientists by funding this work which served the interests of the company. 0 area (Tier 1), March 19th This article picked up Le Monde?s article 0 Marianne (Tier 2), March 19th This article gives the same information as Le Monde?s articie 9onrquoi docteur ?33 (Tier 2), March 19th This article picked up Le Monde?s article 1 article published on the sociaiist was weosite On the digital side, the tweed with the article, posted by Le Monde has been retweeted 1,261 times. It has been potentially viewed 8,716,047 times and commented 22 times. The number of interaction (engagement) is 1,691. Besides the influencers mentioning the article, we can note Benoit Hamon the Socialist candidate for the Presidential elections, who said :"Monsanto papers: an evidence of the requirement to forbid pesticides and endocrine disruptors". The candidate also published an article on Monsanto Papers on his website. The article has also been retweeted by the activists La Fondation Hulot, Corinne Lepage (member of Macron?s team), the Tribunal against Monsanto, Francois Veillerette from G?n?rations futures. II . 'mvul - ACTION PLAN Our recommendation: As soon as we agree on the French statement sent on Saturday and can point to the documents Sam has been looking for, we recommend to send it to the media which covered the news, except to Le Monde, as it is a lost battle. Plus, we will call our good contacts neutral media in order to publish this statement and balance the coverage. Our media recommendation: - L?Usine Nouvelle: we know well this journalist who did a press trip in Saint-Louis and Boissay site in France and published a very qualitative feature coverage in May 2016. Plus she is the only journalist who wrote a positive article following report last week. - Agriculture Environnement: this journalist knows very well the company and could be an easy win to publish the statement in a specialized media Semences et progr?s: this journalist knows very well the company and could be an easy win to publish the statement in a specialized media The statement should also be declined in a few tweets (neutral, assured tone) pointing to the statement to be published on the France website (-is working on a proposition of tweets). Generally?spea king, as there is shared appreciation in the group that we want to avoid looking ?feverish? on the matter, I would favor opting for responding in a neutral, assured, factual tone rather than pointing fingers and looking like we are attacking. What we can say is "we regret that the plaintiffs did not take time to read through all the documents up until when Dr. Perry concluded his work". In terms of calendar, all of this, should be carried out this afternoon at the latest. Best Regards, i?irectar ?eniar From: Sent: dimanche 19 mars 2017 16:12 -, Subject: RE: LE MONDE Just to confirm - very comfortable with the targeted approach we?ll just have to work through the options and try everything. The more we consider the targets on an individual basis the better our chance of winning; -will do whatever she wants to and unfortunately is not going to be discouraged by arguments around the facts. Best approach is to make sure that there is a well-substantiated alternative narrative directed at influencers that reassures our allies and provides a basis for people to focus on the product and not the conspiracy theories. For me the trade/farm press will be key to reassure grassroots and the wider farming community we cannot afford From: [ma?itoi Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 12:30 PM To: Cc: ?nionsanto?om> 777777777777777777777777777 mimntaoubi?mf?; - fieisi?:maneuronergsm; @monsanto.mm>; ?fieishrnanenro secomz <1r monsanto.eom> Subject: Re: LE MONDE Thank you. have spoken with -. I understand that given the broader Monsanto stance on the litigation, not to mention what we all know about Monsanto's reputation in France, there are limits to what we can constructively do, be that on the media relations front that FH is handling or on our public affairs side. I do think there are two narrow pieces of action worth considering if you have not thought of then already at this juncture. Both are hyper?targeted and designed to contain the initial impact of what may be tempted to do: 1. Ifthe Concord study has already landed some useful findings (i understand it will be ready for release in April), it may be useful to see if Concord could brief the Elysee and Matignon on the broader economic and policy case for in advance of its release (ie this week), that may cause the Government to urge cooler heads to prevail, and insist that Ministers show some confidence in ECHA. This may not prevent S?gol?ne from coming out, out it could show her continued isolation from the rest of Government. 2. On the influencer front, it may be worth informally sounding out how scientific and policy influencers of government have greeted the news and, in so doing, try to modulate their the strongest part of your statement, and the one that merits standing alone, is the fact that Perry ultimately shares Monsanto?s conclusions (as long as we are 100% sure he is still ofthat mindset). That could be the angle to try to shape what governments science and policy advisors are saying on this In summary, no frontal Media?driven response by Monsanto, and no noise, but two well targeted initiatives which, at the very least, will not hurt and could allow us to mitigate some of the political effects ofthis Beyond that, I do not think there is much we can do to realistically change the campaign dynamic that could set in on this issue. Happy to discuss further and follow?up with implementation if you are comfortable with that course of action. Best, Le 18 mars 2017 a 11:49,_ a ?crit I agree on the analysis will call you to discuss the approach as we need some cool heads and we should limitt panic-strewn language on this. We should be thinking objectively about the way forward The opposition will do what they will on this our response will need to avoid being defensive at all costs. For stakeholder conversations the following should be useful: "In an attempt to mischaracterize the safety of the plaintiffs? attorneys are sifting through millions of pages of internal Monsanto documents and emails, cherry picking comments, and taking those comments out of context to paint an inaccurate picture of While Dr. Parry did initially raise questions about the genotoxic effect of Roundup, after further analysis, he fully agreed with Monsanto that the effects were arti?cial and not relevant to real world conditions. This is consistent with the ?ndings of experts at regulatory authorities around the world. Just last week, the European Chemicals Agency Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) concluded that ?the available scienti?c evidence did not meet the criteria to classify as a carcinogen, as a mutagen or as toxic for reproduction.? From: Sent: Saturda March 18, 2017 11:15 AM To:* censuitantspubiicispfr> Cc:_ ?monsantccon? Subject: Re: LE MONDE Hello all, We should regroup on this ASAP to determine what steps to take. Here is the impact of the news flagged left will use this as rapidly as she can to call into question last week?s ECHA findings. 2. This will prompt if they are not actually ahead of her - -and -s Green Party supporters to come out on this issue in the campaign context. 3. -, based on his second round calculus, will have to play broad tent politics on the matter to assure alignment with -,-and Green voters. His campaign is at risk of becoming far less balanced on the issue than we had arranged for to date. 4. -will return to her historical position on and make hay with this among farming communities. I -Am- .LAII, Publicis Consultants +33 6? Le 18 mars 2017 a 11:06,? _@consaitaatspabiicisfr> a ?crit: Dan, - The subject has just become electoral and it is catastrophic. "Monsanto Papers" will probably find a strong resonance, with a probable "soap" with a monopolistic position for FOUCART. You may have noticed that In June 2016, he was appointed French scientific editor of the year 2016, with special congratulations from the Association of British Science Writers (whose prize is supported by the of the pharmaceutical company Janssen). It is a crisis mechanism that we now need, not only mitigation. Regards, Public Affairs Corporate Communications (PACC) tia?ticiisuitants Jubiicieir 75002 Paris France Tel. +331- Mob. +33 <20].7 03 18 MON Le Monde <20].7 03 18 MON Le Monde What Monsanto Papers reveal about Rounduppdf> Disclaimer The information in this email and any attachments may contain proprietary and con?dential information that is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby noti?ed that any disclosure, copying, distribution, retention or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. When addressed to our clients or vendors, any information contained in this e?mail or am attachments is subiect to the terms and This email and any attachments were sent from a Monsanto email account and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete this email and any attachments immediately. Any unauthorized use, including disclosing, printing, storing, copying or distributing this email, is prohibited. All emails and attachments sent to or from Monsanto email accounts may be subject to monitoring, reading, and archiving by Monsanto, including its affiliates and subsidiaries, as permitted by applicable law. Thank you. Disclaimer The information in this email and any attachments may contain proprietary and con?dential information that is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby noti?ed that any disclosure, copying, distribution, retention or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. When addressed to our clients or vendors, any information contained in this e-mail or any attachments is subject to the terms and conditions in any governing contract. If you have received this e?mail in error, please immediately contact the sender and delete the e-mail. This email and any attachments were sent from.a Monsanto email account and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete this email and any attachments immediately. Any unauthorized use, including disclosing, printing, storing, copying or distributing this email, is prohibited. All emails and attachments sent to or from Monsanto email accounts may be subject to monitoring, reading, and archiving by Monsanto, including its affiliates and subsidiaries, as permitted by applicable law. Thank you.