Marketing / PR / Corporate Communications

“Oil companies…sought…to burnish their reputations…as environmental champions.”

“Disinformation works.” “Campaigns all run a similar playbook.”

“Climate disinformation…reduces public understanding of climate change, lowers support for…action, cancels out accurate information…and reinforces climate silence.”

“Confuse the public and decision makers” “Delay…action…Protect fossil fuel businesses.”

 

Public Relations Historical Events:

 

In 1946 the oil industry decided to sponsor “research to inform and shape public opinion.”

E.B. Harrison “made his mark in 1962”; called “the godfather of 'greenwashing’…[which means] taking steps to appear environmentally responsible without changing actual policies.”

 

1971: A campaign introduced the new idea of “littering”. Start-up money came from beverage, can and bottle companies as well as "the tobacco industry [who] developed programs with Keep America Beautiful that focused on cigarette litter solutions acceptable to the tobacco industry such as volunteer clean-ups and ashtrays…

“Keep America Beautiful’s narrow focus on litter…is seen as an attempt to divert responsibility from industries that manufacture and sell disposable products.”

 

Starting in the 1990s, “The [plastics] industry sold the public on an idea it knew wouldn’t work — that the majority of plastic could be, and would be, recycled — all while making billions of dollars selling the world new plastic.” “The ads were paid for by…companies like Exxon, Chevron, Dow, DuPont.” “The oil industry [pulls in] more than $400 billion a year making plastic.”

 

In the early 2000s, the marketing/advertising/public-relations firm, Ogilvy and Mather, thought of revitalizing the litter-is-your-fault concept for their client, BP. “It’s here that British Petroleum, or BP, first promoted and soon successfully popularized the term ‘carbon footprint’.” They wanted to build an “emotional affinity beyond the product.”

 

“Between 2005 and 2008, the Kochs alone spent nearly $25m on organizations fighting climate reform,” partly through the use of think-tanks: “Sold to the public as quasi-scholarly organizations, [these think-tanks] real function was to legitimize the right to pollute for oil, gas and coal companies.”

 

In 2008 big oil’s message was to shift the blame for pollution to auto-makers and car drivers: “Improve your gas mileage”, they recommended. And, “It is important we reduce greenhouse gas emissions…Improving the efficiency of the vehicles people drive is one way to do so.”

 

2019: a top consultant admitted regrets. “‘I was wrong’ Frank Luntz told a…Senate…panel.”

“Luntz…helped Republicans hold power…He crafted talking points for the Koch brothers…”

He had…urged politicians to “emphasize a lack of scientific certainty around climate change.”

 

2020: “Subaru is…hiding its slow progress on EVs behind ‘green’ marketing .”

Subaru has paid organizations that appear to be environmentally friendly - REI, the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), and National Park Foundation (NPF) - to join marketing promotions. Who are the NPCA and the NPF?

The NPCA and the NPF are NOT the National Park Service, despite similar names.

 

I called REI about their contest to win a pollution-creating Subaru. I was dismissed.

I spoke with a representative of Subaru at the San Francisco Auto Show: same result.

The Senior Vice President of Marketing for Subaru of America, Inc. stated (in a press release) they hope to “Keep America…Beautiful.”

 

Corporate consultants use various tactics.

 

One is to hire their own scientists to rebut legitimate, unbiased science.

“What they did was immoral. They spread doubt about the dangers of climate change when their own researchers were confirming how serious a threat it was.”

“Revelations about Exxon Mobil’s campaign came from…the Los Angeles Times [which] documented…efforts to manipulate public opinion.”

 

What will they think of next?