For the record, I am not paid to specificially target groups who target products developed by Monsanto. I am paid to research and write on environmental issues of national significance always taking an evidence-based approach.

Jennifer, the institute of public affairs is funded by the companies you are defending. Your targets are those that oppose the products your company defends. For more information see

http://www.gmwatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=259&page=I

Quotes: With Monsanto amongst its funders, the IPA has a specific focus on 'biotechnology', saying it wants to 'combat the misinformation put out by radical groups' who oppose genetic engineering. It claims this technology is actually 'safer', 'cheaper' and 'more environmentally friendly' than conventional plant or animal breeding. ...
In 2001 IPA launched what it claimed was 'an international first' when it 'started publishing a monthly corporate newsletter, by subscription only, dedicated to watching activist NGOs' [Non-Governmental Organisations]. These were, it warned, 'targeting business' and other 'organisations as never before'. This new corporate newsletter was NGO Watch Digest

With regard to its own funding, the IPA claims it maintains its independence because, 'Our annual budget - of about $1 million - is obtained from more than 2,000 individuals, corporations and foundations'. However, according to Sharon Bedder , 'Almost one third of IPA's $1.5 million annual budget comes from mining and manufacturing companies.' Interestingly, IPA's attack on Aboriginal treaty and land rights has included a call for 'no bias against miners' (Gary Johns, The Australian, 20 June 2003). The aggressive character of IPA's attacks on Aboriginal self-determination eventually lead mining company RioTinto to withdraw its support. (Disinfopedia )