Calvert claims that it “is one of the nation’s largest socially responsible mutual fund firms with approximately $14 billion in assets under management.” Among other things, it refuses to invest in companies that produce porn, saying:
Calvert believes that consumers have a right to products and services that are safe, of high quality, and not harmful to them or society at large. It is important to Calvert that companies manufacture and market their products and services in a responsible manner, while providing access to all consumers and avoiding offensive images. Products that are inherently unsafe or problematic, such as tobacco, weapons, alcohol, gambling, and pornography, are unacceptable to Calvert. Such products by nature do harm to the consumer (by damaging health) or society (by burdening society with addictions or the threat of violence).
We support this stance, but we would like Calvert to go further. Major corporations, such as several large media companies and hotel chains, make significant profits from distributing porn. We would like Calvert to divest from these companies as well.
We corresponded with Ellen Kennedy, a Social Research Analyst at Calvert, about this issue in December. She wrote:
Thank you for your inquiry concerning pornography in Calvert’s screening process. We screen for pornography in two basic categories: marketing/advertising, and within the media industry.
Calvert does not invest in companies that produce pornography. For companies that distribute pornography, we ask that companies ensure that customers have some way to block these images. For example, our analysis of Internet Service Providers includes the parental controls and content blocking software that companies makes available. Our review of cable companies considers the blocking technology or packaging available to customers…
As you can imagine, it is impossible to monitor all images, sounds, words, etc. for these industries, so we do our best through company research and updates from watchdog groups. We recognize that monitoring involves a certain amount of subjectivity. We have to assess these companies on a case-by-case basis, considering their target audiences and industries. In addition, some companies, particularly media conglomerates, are a mixed bag. One company may have a subsidiary that carries “shock jock” radio, and another subsidiary with feminist programming. Most media conglomerates fail our screens, and we are in dialogue with those few that do pass our screens…
We responded:
…We’re glad that Calvert requires its media investments to enable their customers to block porn. In light of the extensive and growing reach and harm of porn, documented on our site at NoPornNorthampton.org, we hope Calvert will go further and divest from companies that profit in any significant way from this unusually harmful product, one with few positive features to recommend it…
We believe the average person can quickly discern porn from non-porn content. Certainly the media companies must do this if they are to permit their customers to block porn…
We have not yet heard anything further from Calvert on the subject, so we invite the public to contact Calvert and urge them to divest from porn distributors as well as porn producers. Calvert investors believe their investments are benefiting society or at least not harming it. This is not the case when it comes to porn profits.