Newmont's Halo

This is the New York Times article I had mentioned in class earlier in the quarter, regarding coverage of the Newmont mining situation in Peru: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/25/international/americas/25GOLD.html. The article is long and seems to be well-researched, but starts to feel a little funny near the end. It uses a lot of quotes from Newmont folks, and states that Newmont has become something of a surrogate government in the absence of the Peruvian government's ability to address the persistent poverty in the Cajamarca region. The article reports, "[Newmont] is contributing money for schools and clinics and building some small water treatment plants in the villages. In all, the company says it will spend nearly $20 million this year on social programs." A Newmont manager is quoted, "Modern mining can coexist with cattle, agriculture and tourism. Today we begin a new history for communities around here." The article goes on to say that Newmont is committed to long-term treatment, clean-up and community support--that it promises to set aside funds for such long-term treatment, even though it has yet to do so. After having finished the article, I felt that Newmont came out sounding not all that bad, and wondered how this portrayal would be understood by Mirtha and other activists working against the mining corporation's ongoing human rights abuses.