The Public Campaign Action Fund released a new analysis finding that the oil and coal industries spent $427.2 million so far this year of the year to shift public opinion and to capture the eyes, ears, and support of Congress on critical energy issues.
| Comment: 
| Tools: 
Like what you read here? Get our top five stories in your inbox every week. » here's a preview
Enter your email and subscribe now!
Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy.
There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.
Although all public relations professionals are bound by a duty to not knowingly mislead the public, some have executed comprehensive campaigns of misinformation on behalf of industry clients on issues ranging from tobacco and asbestos to seat belts.
Lately, these fringe players have turned their efforts to creating confusion about climate change. This PR campaign could not be accomplished without the compliance of media as well as the assent and participation of leaders in government and business.
Help us clear the PR pollution that clouds climate science. Thanks to our dedicated readers, the DeSmog project counters the seeds of climate confusion.
Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy. The Desmog project is our answer to industry PR spin.
Thank you for all you do. Please donate what you can. Whether its $10 or $100 every bit helps.
Powered by PayPal
Yeah, it's obvious that although they want everyone to think there is no alternative to BAU (continuing to expand fossil fuel extraction and use), they are scared that people will choose a different future.
Well, to be fair, climate activist groups lobby quite a good lot too. But what really distinguishes activist lobbying from inactivist lobbying, is the secrecy and outright dishonesty that characterizes the inactivist's efforts.
Activists and activist groups have no problem being open about their affiliations. Inactivist groups, in contrast, can only thrive by hiding or downplaying their actual connections.
* * *
At the risk of riding my hobby-horse too often, I'll once more quote verbatim the words of Tom Harris, Executive Director of the so-called "International Climate Science Coalition":
"[...] We need regular high-impact media coverage of the findings of leading scientists -- not just one or two publications, but we need to have hundreds all over the world. We need to have a high degree of information sharing and cooperation between groups, so that when [inactivist] Vincent Gray for example has an article published in New Zealand, we can take the same piece and we can (say) submit it to newspapers all over North America and Europe.
"Then we have a nicely well-coordinated response, where letters to the editor and phone calls are made. `Congratulations on publishing that article!” You know, it's interesting because I've had many of my articles opposed so strongly, by environmentalists through phone calls and letters to the editor, that they just simply dry up, they just won't publish this again. So this does have feedback, I mean, these are people that run these newspapers, and they're scared, and impressed, and encouraged, depending on the feedback they get.
"We have to have grassroots organizations doing exactly that kind of thing: coordinated local activism."
(http://tinyurl.com/5fb74s)
Now take a moment to think about what the terms "information sharing" and "coordinated local activism" mean in this context.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Sign the "Sue Us" Petition!
Urge Monckton et al. to sue Gore as promised!
http://tinyurl.com/6265jx
Why is regular ole advertising lumped in with this? Every company advertises. Buying gas is legal everywhere worldwide, so of course an oil company will advertise.
One may object to lobbying and political contributions, but they are perfectly legal also.
Actually, for the size of the revenues of oil and gas companies, I'm a bit surprised the dollar amounts mentioned aren't larger.
This whole focus on PR money is a mistake. It lends itself easily to half truths and counter attacks. It's really not worth it.
And the reason is this:
Which John Lefebvre?
Regarding Christopher Monckton's talking point on DeSmogBlog's John Lefebvre's `solar energy investments', it's been found that the said investments actually belong to... a different John Lefebvre, living in San Francisco Bay Area!
http://tinyurl.com/6gnwej
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/0/117/6a0
So, another denialist "fact" by Christopher "We Scientists" Monckton bites the dust...
Some great comments:
Experts sound global warming alarm at U.S. Senate session in R.I. (08-22-2008)
quote
...
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, who chaired the hearing, warned that information questioning the existence of global warming or its connection to human activity “is part of an effort to fool people.” That effort entails labeling those who buy into global warming as “eccentric scientists or wacky environmentalists,” Whitehouse said.
...
When Whitehouse was asked after the session why no skeptics were invited to testify, the senator said he is not aware of any “climate change deniers” in Rhode Island.
He joked during the hearing that “Washington seems to be the high-water mark” for industry-based groups that he accused of trying to “sow doubt” about the phenomenon. “They are nervous about the changes necessary as we move to a green economy,” Whitehouse said.
“In this case, the science seems to be unequivocal,” the senator said. “We are not responding as a society to this threat as rapidly as we should.”
end quote
http://www.woonsocketcall.com/content/view/47801/112/
Even the trolls might be interested in reading this.
Could at least one of the causes of life and the Earth, as we know them, "going to hell in a handbasket" be that the all-too-human global political economy is constructed as a perpetual motion machine and operated as a colossal pyramid scheme?
As described above, please note that the 'perpetual motion machine' is unsustainable in its current form and its operation as a colossal pyramid scheme is also unsustainable. Neither the present form nor the functioning of the global economy responds to the practical requirements of Earth's limitations as a relatively small, evidently finite, noticeably frangible planetary home.