NRSP (think: Not Really Science People) sets this out as it's First Priority Project:
“Understanding Climate Change”Think about that for a minute. A true grassroots campaign occurs when a bunch of people who share an interest rise up spontaneously to fight for a common interest. Which of your neighbours might be inclined to rise up spontaneously to “counter the Kyoto Protocol and other greenhouse gas reduction schemes”? Conscientious objectors in the war on climate change don't join astroturf groups.
A proactive grassroots campaign to counter the Kyoto Protocol and other greenhouse gas reduction schemes while promoting sensible climate change policy.
The quote comes from a Wall Street Journal article by Richard Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT.
This is a dangerous and slightly desperate trend, because it tends to remove climate science from the climate change debate. It also preys on journalists' darkest fears: that the scourge of censorship, once unleashed, will invade every aspect of their practice.
The most recent outcry in defence of climate change denial arose when the prestigious UK science body, the Royal Society, made the unusual public gesture of demanding that ExxonMobil stop funding organizations that attack the climate change consensus.
There are few parties in the public realm that are more credible than a “grassroots organization” - a group of citizens who rise up with no agenda other than to speak frankly about a public issue. Politicians are inevitably suspect and businesses are clearly self-interested, so reporters are always searching for the “common man” - the “person on the street” - or from impartial experts. No news source wraps up those characteristics more efficiently than the true grass roots organization.
A European research firm has identified Canadian tar sands giant Suncor among the world's top 19 oil and gas companies as the best performer in generating carbon reduction strategies.
Chevron, ExxonMobil and EnCana were identified as the three worst.
And if you don't believe Arnie, check out these factoids:
It would be nice if we public relations and media types could comment on climate science with the same sense of intelligent self-assurance that climate scientists J.A. Curry, P.J. Webster and G.J. Holland bring to this analysis of the effects of politics and media on public debates about science.
These three scientists were among four authors (including H.R. Chang) of a 2005 Science magazine paper that argued this:
I am still stammering at the offensive, incompetent and hysterical goofiness of Terence Corcoran's diatribe yesterday in the Financial Post.
I have a longish list of complaints and objections, but let me present just two here today.
First, the suggestion that I have an anti-corporate bias is silly. (And the implicit anti-Islamic characterization is, at the very least, racially offensive.) For the past 25 years, I have been running a nicely successful public relations business, which itself is incorporated. I have been doing all those things that corporations do: paying rent, paying taxes, paying employees, participating in the economy in a direct way (rather than as a voyeur) - and giving the best advice I can think of to other corporations.