Under what circumstances would the legal team have to edit a post?

The R&D team’s goal is to highlight their work, note recently released scientific papers, and provide insight into important scientific trends and events. For example, George Mensah, a leading cardiologist, told me in a meeting that he really wanted to post something on both American Heart Month and World Hypertension Day. One of his primary areas of research is the role of diet and nutrition on heart health and he had messages that he wanted to share via this blog so he wrote posts for each of those events.

Why even write such patently false bullshit? The R&D team has yet to write word one about their work (assuming that their work actually is R&D rather than politics), I have yet to see a link to a recently released scientific paper, and I have been offered no insights into any important scientific trends. As for Mensah's contributions, did you really mean to classify American Heart Month as an “event”? Mensah's columns add nothing to the pool of trustworthy health information out there; they say nothing new, and they are inevitably going to be perceived as less trustworthy than information from another source if they did happen to say anything novel. So why say anything? Why not simply contribute to the crafting of an AHS message? Ah, I see. The real message was not the health tips (which might be found anywhere). The real message was the link to PepsiCo's eleven global goals. Which is fine, by itself. I actually believe you guys that you are trying to improve your level of corporate responsibility. What annoys me is your incredible stupidity in transparently lying about what you are trying to accomplish here.