The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has responded to accusations that it invests in companies that abuse society. LA Times has reported that the philanthropic Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has investments in companies allegedly involved in toxic pollution, predatory lending and even slave child labor.

Initially, the Gates Foundation committed to revising its investment policies and stated that it would determine if it will pull money out of the companies that abuse the society, but later reconsidered its position.

Cheryl Scott, the chief operating officer of the Gates Foundations posted an explanatory note presenting the foundation' investment philosophy. "I want to take this opportunity to follow up on recent media reports about the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's investments and our processes for making decisions about them. I also want to clarify some aspects of our policy that may have been unclear in previous statements", said Scott. "While we do not anticipate any change in our approach to investments, we have not previously described in writing the philosophy of the foundation and its co-chairs."

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation will not overhaul its investment policy, even though some of the activities of the companies it invests in may be considered harmful, and will continue to be a passive investor in said companies.

Cheryl Scott based the argument of the Gates Foundation's investment policy on the argument that there are two sides to every story. "Many of the companies mentioned in the Los Angeles Times articles, such as Ford, Kraft, Fannie Mae, Nestle, and General Electric, do a lot of work that some people like, as well as work that some people do not like. Some activities might even be viewed positively by some people and negatively by others," explained Scott.

There are only two instances in which the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation will not invest, both have been defined by none other than Bill and Melinda:

1) if a company's profit model is centrally tied to corporate activity that we find egregious. This is why the foundation does not own tobacco stocks. It's unlikely that this choice has affected the activities of these companies, but Bill and Melinda have decided not to own these stocks in any case.
2) if owning shares in a company would represent a conflict of interest for Bill or Melinda.