Advertisers
If you didn’t see the segment we are talking about, transcripts can be found here:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0701/05/pzn.01.html
The list of advertisers below comes from someone who taped the show.
Cingular - email should go to to the Executive Director of Media Relations mark.a.siegel@cingular.com
Alka Seltzer, Bayer Aspirin, and One A Day Mens are all owned by Bayer, comments about the press can be given to Bayer here.
The people at oneaday.com have this page set up for correspondence: http://oneaday.com/contact/emailus.htm
Alka Seltzer Plus has this page: http://www.alkaseltzer.com/asp/emailus.html
Microsoft - US based media relations should be emailed to mediarelations@wctv.com and contact information for other countries can be found here: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/internat.mspx
Cialis is made by Eli Lilly, email should go to the Chief Corporate Spokesman, Philip (Phil) Belt at pbelt@lilly.com or you can fax him at (317) 277-2162
American Express, contact the Manager, Public Affairs and Communications, Bet Franzone at bet.franzone@aexp.com or via fax at 212.640.0332
Walgreens - I don’t see any easy email addresses, snail mail and telephone numbers can be found on their contact page: http://www.walgreens.com/contactus/corporate.jsp
Update:
Chairman & CEO- David Bernauer dave.bernauer@walgreens.com
President & COO- Jeff Rein jeff.rein@walgreens.com
Divisional VP, Corporate Advertising- Craig Sincliar craid.sinclair@walgreens.com
Again, be polite. Point out how disappointed you are to see them sponsoring this type of program. Give specific details about the facts given in error. Point out how many families have adopted from China in the past ten years (give the State Dept site for proof) and express your opinion about how these families are going to feel about being called Racists when in fact they were just looking for ways to build their families.
January 6th, 2007 at 12:00 pm
RQ - you are amazing, providing us with all this info and getting us organized! Talk about “doing something” with our anger instead of just sitting back and taking it. I definitely plan on writing some letters this weekend.
Thanks so much!
January 6th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
RQ - thanks so much for all you do! I’m a long time lurker, 1st time poster, but the CNN piece has me and DH so fired up! We are going to contact Fox News to see if they might consider a counter story about how racist and insulting CNN is? Probably a long shot, but we’re going to give it a shot.
At a minimum, I’d like to see Paula Zahn and CNN issue an apology.
January 6th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
Anyone looking for some “evidence” to include as you write, might consider referring to some of the following — Caveat: I have not read all these essays in their entirity: (Sorry the post is long)
Intercountry Adoption from China: Examining Cultural Heritage and Other Postadoption Issues
Jay W. Rojewski & Jacy L. Rojewski:
Their research suggests that the primary reason adopters choose China is: because children needs homes, U.S. adoption laws, wanting a daughter, the belief that a parent cannot later make claims on the child, and respect for the Chinese culture (27)
Born in China: Birth Country Perspectives on International Adoption.
Authors: Luo, Nih1 n_Iuo@umwestern.edu
Bergquist, Kathleen Ja Sook2 kathleen.bergquist@ccmail.nevada.edu
Source: Adoption Quarterly; 2004, Vol. 8 Issue 1, p21-39, 19p
Abstract: International adoption has been presented in the literature almost exclusively from a dominant western perspective with little consideration for that of the sending countries. This study seeks to capture Chinese perceptions of international adoption. The inextricable relationship between China’ s family planning policies and the placing of orphans in the diaspora for adoption led to a sample which included government officials (N = 12), welfare institution administrators (currently in China, the official term for an orphanage is “welfare institution”) (N = 15), and a non-specific adult population (N = 180). Findings indicated that overall participants viewed international adoption as providing positive opportunities for abandoned children, with government and welfare institution personnel viewing it as an appropriate response to an overburdened system. They also pointed to the government’ s active role in post-placement monitoring to be integral to the success of China’s international adoptions. Concerns for the children’s loss of culture and international adoption as being a source of national embarrassment were expressed within the general population, however, it is suggested that this perception may be mediated by personal exposure to adoption. This study is significant in its unique attempt to capture a non-western perspective of a phenomenon which profoundly impacts Chinese families and children. It also brings to light the need for further inquiry which can capture the impact and implications of this borderless child welfare practice for Chinese.
An essay that explains why some former Soviet countries are not adopters first choice:
Title: Find More Like ThisINTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION: TOWARD A REGIME THAT RECOGNIZES THE “BEST INTERESTS” OF ADOPTIVE PARENTS.
Authors: Steltzner, Donovan M.
Source: Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law; Winter2003, Vol. 35 Issue 1, p113-152, 40p
Abstract: Focuses on the problems in Russian and Romanian international adoptions. Lack of a unified cohesive consumer protection framework for adoptive parents; Types of consumer remedies available at the state level for adoptions gone wrong; Avoidance of delay and discrimination; Reasons on why Russia has a large source of adoptable children.
an essay about the value of international adoption
Title: Find More Like ThisREGULATING THE GLOBAL ADOPTION OF CHILDREN.
Authors: Varnis, Steven L.1,2
Source: Society; Jan/Feb2001, Vol. 38 Issue 2, p39-46, 8p
Abstract: This article deals with regulating the global adoption of children. Like most transnational activities, international adoption has been strongly criticized, for a multitude of faults. Among the most vehemently asserted are that baby-selling and child-trafficking, bribery and corruption and exploitation of the human capital of poor countries are involved. The fundamental problem underlying the current system is the abundance of children without families. Foreign adoptions have traditionally served humanitarian purposes, while also providing children to the childless. The dialectic between providing homes for children and providing children for parents must be recognized.
an essay about the benefits {to children} of ia
Title: Find More Like ThisFamilies without borders–I.
Authors: Freundlich, Madelyn
Source: UN Chronicle; 1999, Vol. 36 Issue 2, p88, 2p, 4c
Abstract: Part I. Reports the growth of international adoption in developed countries. Factors that contributed to the growth; Challenges posed by international adoption to international understanding; Views on adoption from a national perspective.
January 6th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
RQ - thanks so much for all you do! We are long time lurkers, first time posters. The CNN piece put us over the edge. We’re thinking about contacting Fox News to see if they might run a “counter” story to slam CNN for the being the jerks they are. Probably a long shot, but we’re going for it.
January 6th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
Keep it simple when contacting advertisers. They just need the basic facts. The main thing with them is volume of mail - if sponsoring a particular show gets them a lot of negative correspondence then they will certainly have a talk with the higher ups of that show and of that network.
January 6th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
Thank you RQ for all this info, I will be writing my letter this weekend and mailing them off on Monday.
CNN’s catch phrase “Your most trusted name in news” - Not after last night it isnt. We trust them to tell us the truth and to report the FACTS. Clearly no research was done for last nights show by the 3 people on the panel. The only person that knew what they were talking about was the correspondent reporting from Beijing.
Rose0104 made a good suggestion we should send our thoughts and views to competitors and hopefully they will report the truth and facts on behalf of all adoptive families.
January 6th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
Fox news is no better than CNN. DOn’t expect a “fair and balanced” report from them either.
January 6th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
Maybe I’m confused, but I don’t see any part of the transcript in which they call adoptive parents racists. Where exactly is that written?
January 6th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
Follow the SOLANGEL MALDONADO links. She is the author of a paper entitled “Discouraging Racial Preferences in Adoptions”.
And from the transcript:
MARTIN: Maybe they think they can adopt a smart kid that is going to grow up to be a doctor? I don’t know. They need to realize that’s called training, not just inherent, it will happen when they’re born.
Angel, help me out.
MALDONADO: Absolutely. This is something I’ve been looking into for a long time. Americans have this love affair with girls from China. There is this belief, this perception, irrational as it might be that if you adopt a little girl from China, she’s going to be intelligent, she’s going to be more lovable.
MARTIN: Like the porcelain doll.
MALDONADO: We definitely see that idea of the beautiful Chinese little girl, as compared to do, they really want to adopt a black boy.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
Wackosuzanne–Oh, they didn’t come right out and *say* it. They just made sure it was implied in just about every single thing they said.
I do suspect that some of the more egregious statements were supposed to be “funny” or sarcastic.
Looking at the context of the segment (a series on race relations in the U.S.), I’m not surprised that this was the end result. But I sure as hell would have been much happier if she had done an analysis of how the myth of the model minority might impact all these children being adopted from China, rather than the tired old “why don’t they adopt from the U.S.”, “they want smart babies”, “they want porcelain dolls”, etc.
Still fuming.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
They do not specifically call us racists but are implying that we have chosen to adopt from China because of racial stereo-types. The panel was deflecting their racial opinions on the parents that adopt from China saying that we think Chinese kids will be ’smarter’ than other races.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
This just proves why I gave up on TV news a long time ago, and I have a degree in Journalism. I frankly won’t waste my time writing to CNN or the advertisers because the advertisers don’t get editorial approval prior to the show airing; and CNN, FOX, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, all push for guests who’ll say outrageous things in short sound bites which are then summarized further by inane hosts - like Paula, or Matt Lauer or “Fill in the blank”.
The bias and misinformation is out there and won’t be going away any time soon. Frankly I would rather spend my time educating one person at a time who I’ll likely see again in my local grocery, restaurant, etc. The benefits are local and tangible.
Now if we could just convince homeland security to extend the i-171, to create a streamlined renewal process, and why exactly do fingerprints “expire”? The amount of money that could be saved, by both families and by the government, by over-hauling those rules and red tape would be extraordinary.
I’ve written all of my reps, and I’m about to do again since we have a new senator in RI. Hopefully everyone else in the US has written their senators and congressional reps reminding them of these important issues the real impacts they have on adoptive families - I know I would have rather put the money I gave the dept of homeland security, a second time into Lili’s college fund.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Wackosuzanne, that’s a good point to make and it’s important that we understand why the chatter last night was racist.
Definition of Racism:
The doctrine that race is the basic determinant of human abilities and that, therefore, the various racial groups constitute a hierarchy in which one group is properly regarded as superior to others. Racism has also been defined using the following formula: Power+Prejudice=Racism. Racism has also been defined as a “system of advantage based on race.”
http://www.unk.edu/offices/aaeo/index.php
Now, from the transcript:
MARTIN: Maybe they (adoptive parents) think they can adopt a smart kid that is going to grow up to be a doctor? I don’t know. They need to realize that’s called training, not just inherent, it will happen when they’re born.
MALDONADO: Absolutely. This is something I’ve been looking into for a long time. Americans have this love affair with girls from China. There is this belief, this perception, irrational as it might be that if you adopt a little girl from China, she’s going to be intelligent, she’s going to be more lovable.
Pretty clear cut to me that they are deducing Adoptive Parents as racist in terms of feeling that they (adoptive parents) believe that Chinese children are smarter than other countries’ children.
January 6th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
RQ, you truly *are* amazing. Thank you for sharing this with all of us.
I can’t stand CNN.
Reading the transcript just makes me sick to my stomach. I feel sorry for those people. To be so jaded and clueless and have such hardened hearts must be a sad way to live.
January 6th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
I found a better site for e-mailing Bayer. It allows you to type more than 1000 characters. The webpage is as follows:
http://www.bayerus.com/contact/i_email.html
January 6th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
I wonder how Bill Gates would feel if he knew that his company had an advertisement on a show that had such garbage on it?!! I know that he and his wife have donated a LOT of money to my agency.
January 6th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
While I agree that Fox news certainly would give no guarantee that their coverage would be any better, I can not imagine it being worse. They would also have the motivation of easily pointing out inaccuracies in a rival station’s story. I submitted this statement to Fox under their “newstip” section:
International adoption has gained growing interest as several celebrity adoptions have jumped into the spotlight. Last night Paula Zahn shocked the international adoption community when she and her panel characterized parents adopting from China as simply wanting children who are “cute”, “smart”, or “healthier”. The many factually untrue statements presented on this segment were astounding, and should be exposed.
January 6th, 2007 at 2:34 pm
RQ, I have a sil who has a sil who works as a reporter for CNN and I am going to try to verify those email addresses. If I am able I will let you know asap.
January 6th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
I have not watched CNN for a long time for many of the reasons noted above, now I know that many of the other stories on CNN are not accurate or fair to those profiled. We chose China because of the number of waiting children and the domestic adoption laws, NOT because we thought that we wanted “a china doll” SO insulting and shallow. They don;t even consider the transition issues and multicultural issues our children will face. We wanted a family, not a doll!
January 6th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
I’m not sure if this would be bad form from a journalistic point of view (or indeed if we are opening a bigger, nastier, can of worms), but can we tweak other news media (not necessarily restricted to television) about this “story” and the BIG CNN gaff????
I’d be curious if CNN will do an “eating crow” do-over piece.
January 6th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
I do a thorough fisking of the transcript at my blog here .
January 6th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
hi all, me again..lol
just wanted to post what I just wrote on my blog. Perhaps no one will totally agree and I’m not trying to sway anyone, but it was just something I pondered in regards to this whole issue. thanks! :)
“Apparently there was a point in the Paula Zahn show on CNN yesterday where they discussed China adoption. I didn’t see it, and only found out about it through the RQ website. After reading the transcripts on CNN.com I was thoroughly disgusted and sad. What initially started off as probably being a piece about China’s slight change &/or enforcement of policy turned into basically racist slander and defamation of parents who adopt internationally.
I myself am not a perfect being. I have my faults but also have good things about me. Sometimes I look around at people, read things in magazines and papers, hear stories on T.V., etc and wonder where the human race is headed. I think (as well as G sometimes) that people are doomed to destroy one another and themselves…taking what ever’s around them with them. I don’t think this all the time, don’t get me wrong, but sometimes after something like what I read in those transcripts of the Paula Zahn show I just can’t help but to wonder. I firmly believe that racism in this country particularly will never die because there are people out there (media, ACLU, etc) who perpetuate it every day. If a racist angle to a story or event can be created there are people who will do it. Why? I don’t know…fame, notariety, the thrill of debate and confrontation, etc. ???
At some point you have to wonder why people bring children into this world…or in our case, adopt a child into our family to raise and love when there is so much ugliness around.
And then I think of one thing. Hope. Hope that this beautiful little girl will grow up and some how… some way make a difference.”
January 6th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
I am going to throw out all our alka seltzer and NEVER buy it again.
January 6th, 2007 at 4:00 pm
Rq, thank you for the transcripts, I don’t typically watch Cnn, now i remember why. As a former tv photojounalist, i believe you are supposed to show both sides of the story?,, well maybe someone missed that class, I am glad i work for Cingulars competition, otherwise, i think i would quit my job. Just a side note, alot of european countries have large muslim populations, that alot of Americans adopt from.. No wonder the world thinks Americans are ignorant, they must watch cnn.
January 6th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
Two things:
1) What a royal screw up. What they did was have a show that seemed to be mainly about racism/politics, and for some idiotic reason thought that Chinese adoption fit into that category. They then made it worse by using the same panelists, who were probably actually chosen to talk about the political racism stuff, to talk about something they know nothing about. May as well have gone from politics to thermal nuclear fusion. Asinine.
2) I emailed Cenk Uyger and actually got a personal response from him. He agreed that my criticism was legitimate, that after the show he personally questioned some of the things they said, and that he has friends adopting from China. He was very sincere.
Follow RQ’s advice and be civil and informative in your emails. It is more likely to be read and maybe even do some good.
Now I know why we haven’t had cable in almost 10 years!
Unplug everybody!
clem
January 6th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
I wish CNN viewers could also have been told of the many wonderful adoptive American homes that are opened to Chinese children with special needs, the ines who might be considered “less than perfect” in the world’s eyes. I lodged my complaint.
January 6th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
I’d like to point a couple of things out. First of all, the program, as awful as it was, was not about adoption from China, it was about racism. The problem was the unfortunate decision by the producers to use adoption from China as an example (that decision is hard to see as anything but a racist viewpoint in itself) and then put up a panel of moderators to discuss racism using international adoption as an example when none of the panelists knew much of anything about international adoption. That was a serious disconnect and I think that it is the point where CNN loses credibility.
Also, I work for one of those companies listed above, Walgreens. I don’t speak for the company, but I will say that they are supportive of adoption, and have many employees who have adopted internationally, from China and elsewhere. They’ve even featured 2 little girls who have been adopted from China in their advertisements. It is a fantastic company and the fact that they may have had some advertising dollars on a major news program is not indicative of the company’s views on the matter.
January 6th, 2007 at 9:43 pm
I heard about the story in a yahoo group and came here to read everyone’s thoughts.
I am amazed that you have collected this much information to share with us. I think contacting the advertisers is an EXCELLENT idea!
RQ - thanks for all the time you spend to keep us organized.
January 6th, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Rumor Queen — My husband compiled the information provided below.
Companies want you to send complaint letters to the media relations department. That’s their job and they have all the “auto reponse” form letter paragraphs ready for the cutting and pasting. The target for this kind of complaint letter is the executive who spends the cash (millions of dollars) on television advertising. That would be the CMO (chief marketing officer) or any other executive with brand recognition or brand awareness in her/his title. Lacking that, send the letter to the CEO, president, chariman, etc. and it will get deligated down to either the CMO or the media relations dept. So you’ve lost nothing, but gained the chance that a more influential person may actually take the time to learn that their large marketing dollars are supporting a show on CNN that many consider offensive.
Here’s the list that I could quickly easily find with some web searching …
Lilly
Bryce Carmine
President, Global Brand Development Teams
Richard Pilnik
Group Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer
Eli Lilly and Company
Lilly Corporate Center
Indianapolis , Indiana 46285 USA
Phone: +1-317-276-2000
Bayer North America
Attila Molnar
Bayer Corporation President and CEO
100 Bayer Road Pittsburgh , PA 15205-9741
412-777-2000
Cingular Wireless
Marc Lefar
Chief Marketing Officer
Paul R. Roth
Executive Vice President—External Affairs and Public Relations
Cingular Wireless
Glenridge Highlands Two
5565 Glenridge Connector Atlanta , GA 30342 1-866-CINGULAR
Microsoft
unable to locate information
American Express
unable to locate information
Walgreens
Jeffrey A. Rein
President and Chief Executive Officer
Write or call us at:
200 Wilmot Road Deerfield, IL 60015
(847) 914-2500
January 6th, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Rumor Queen — my husband wrote this message and compiled the info found below.
Companies want you to send complaint letters to the media relations department. That’s their job and they have all the “auto reponse” form letter paragraphs ready for the cutting and pasting. The target for this kind of complaint letter is the executive who spends the cash (millions of dollars) on television advertising. That would be the CMO (chief marketing officer) or any other executive with brand recognition or brand awareness in her/his title. Lacking that, send the letter to the CEO, president, chariman, etc. and it will get deligated down to either the CMO or the media relations dept. So you’ve lost nothing, but gained the chance that a more influential person may actually take the time to learn that their large marketing dollars are supporting a show on CNN that many consider offensive.
Here’s the list that I could quickly easily find with some web searching …
January 6th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
Lilly
Bryce Carmine
President, Global Brand Development Teams
Richard Pilnik
Group Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer
Eli Lilly and Company
Lilly Corporate Center
Indianapolis , Indiana 46285 USA
Phone: +1-317-276-2000
January 6th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
Bayer North America
Attila Molnar
Bayer Corporation President and CEO
100 Bayer Road Pittsburgh , PA 15205-9741
412-777-2000
January 6th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
Lilly
Bryce Carmine
President, Global Brand Development Teams
Richard Pilnik
Group Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer
Eli Lilly and Company
Lilly Corporate Center
Indianapolis , Indiana 46285 USA
Phone: +1-317-276-2000
January 6th, 2007 at 9:57 pm
Cingular Wireless
Marc Lefar
Chief Marketing Officer
Paul R. Roth
Executive Vice President—External Affairs and Public Relations
Cingular Wireless
Glenridge Highlands Two
5565 Glenridge Connector Atlanta , GA 30342 1-866-CINGULAR
January 6th, 2007 at 9:58 pm
Walgreens
Jeffrey A. Rein
President and Chief Executive Officer
Write or call us at:
200 Wilmot Road Deerfield, IL 60015
(847) 914-2500
January 6th, 2007 at 10:47 pm
I think out of EVERYTHING we can possibly do, contacting the advertisers can make the biggest difference. One of my very best friends works in advertising, and she says that no matter how many letters we write to CNN, goading the ADVERTISERS to intercede will be the biggest and most effectual way to get CNN to squirm. I’m goingto focus the majority of my efforts on this tactic.
January 7th, 2007 at 5:25 am
We agree the CNN story is upsetting, especially since you expect CNN to do a proper background check.
But equally upsetting is the the comments you can read on the RQ Site*, about couples considering refusing to accept referrals of boys.
When a report like this is broadcasted maybe one should think about the comments posted on this site.
Personally we think those kinds of comments hurt more since they are written by people waiting to adopt.
Thank you RQ for a fantastic site.
*See the comments under “Notes from the days comments”
from January 4th, 2007
January 7th, 2007 at 9:29 am
The are two aspects of this that really confuse me.
First, don’t you think the Asian Americans in this country are gong to be astounded to discover that they face no discrimination here? I mean, if white families are picking Chinese children to adopt because we prefer that race, then Asians must be treated in a highly desirable fashion, right?
Second, if we are such racists, why are we not all adopting from Russia? We can get a white, undistiguishable from my family, baby there.
Twits. Sent out my letters. My husband is working on his.
January 7th, 2007 at 11:08 am
As a hopefully future adoptive parent and as an adoptee myself I have been reading RQ for several months now. this is my first post. Firstly, thank you for all you do RQ. I am in admiration of the time you take helping so many others in the Adoption Community. I applaud all of you visiting and posting here in your actions to bring the terrible content of the CNN piece (I refuse to label it as a report) to the notice of CNN and their advertisers.
I too will be writing to CNN and the advertisers this weekend.
I felt so angry and actually cried when reading the transcript. As an adopted child I was constantly told the story of how I came to belong in my family and why… I imagine they are the same or similar words many of you use or will use with your own children, “we hoped for you, waited and waited for you, we loved you before we knew you, we were so exctied and happy when we knew you were to be ours, you coming into our lives was the very best thing that ever happened to us, we love you so very very much and always will, we are blessed and so very lucky that your birth mother made the decision to ensure you were able to grow up loved and cared for when she herself was unable to care for you.”
It so disrepectful and so very hurtful to adopted children and adults (and of course their parents and other family members) to hear a major international media company sending out a message contradicting all that adopted parents are telling their children. How dare they suggest adopted children have been simply wanted based on their looks, future academic potential, skin colour, etc. The adoption of a child by its parents and the “adoption” of those parents into the heart of that child is quite simply an act of love.
Adopted children already have to deal with difficult issues at different times of their lives which can be compounded due to the ignorance of certain people and their prejudices. Airing inaccurate and racist remarks on a major news network only increases the possibility of adopted children and their parents encountering more such difficult moments. Misinformation filters down from adults to children and the thought that any adopted child should suffer unnecessarily due to comments made to them by people due to the ignorance of CNN makes me angry and sad.
I will be writing my non-emotional factual letters tonight, and will do so on behalf of and in honour of all children affected by adoption and who are too young to have a voice yet.
Sophie
January 7th, 2007 at 10:36 pm
I have been waiting for DAYS to be able to post this. I’ve been on a cruise to the Bahamas the last few days. I was with my husband’s family getting our formal pictures taken outside a bar area when I saw a big screen TV with the words “ADOPTION CRACKDOWN” on CNN with pictures of Asian children. I ran, not walked, but ran to the TV to see what the heck was going on. It took me about 30 seconds to figure out how to turn up the volume, so I saw the whole segment but only got to listen to the last third. Thanks so much for posting the transcript and everyone’s insight on where to send e-mails to CNN about this horrible show that basically called families adopting from China racist because we aren’t adopting black American children that are in foster care.
January 8th, 2007 at 10:21 am
The CNN piece was stupid-period.
Here is a series that has been running on public radio. It is called Finding Home-50 Years of International Adoption. It is fascinating and insightful.
http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/adoption/
Obviously, everyone’s story is their own, but this has been a wonderful piece to listen to. The stories of adoptive parents and adoptees has been handled with great respect. Much can be learned from the past in order to go forward and give our children the best lives possible with respect to them, their history, and their culture.