A new report by Checks and Balances Project found that fracking’s Joe Camel has been “secretly influencing the media and the public on energy issues by moving pro-fossil fuel messaging.”
REPORT: Fossil Fuel Front Groups on Front Page
These groups, and their proponents, have been quoted on average every other day for the past five years in 60 of the largest mainstream newspapers and publications. Despite having received millions of dollars from fossil fuel interests, such as ExxonMobil and Koch Industries, these groups’ financial ties to the fossil fuel industry are rarely mentioned.
I know, right? Not exactly shocking to some of us.
The Checks and Balances Project’s report, “Fossil Fuel Front Groups on the Front Page,” uncovered the extent of this deception by focusing on the 10 most prominent fossil fuel front groups’ traction 58 of the largest daily newspapers, the Associated Press and Politico. This analysis does not include mentions in broadcast, radio or online publications for these 10 advocacy groups. As a result, this report only scratches the surface on these fossil fuel-funded groups’ influence on the energy debate.
Fossil fuel-funded advocacy groups’ failure to divulge their ties to the fossil fuel industry in one story is regrettable, but doing it in over 1,000 stories appears to be planned deception.
The Dallas Morning News has published 11 stories where a Fracking Joe Camel was quoted yet no industry ties were disclosed.
The Fort Worth Star-Telegram has published 17 stories where a Fracking Joe Camel was quoted yet no industry ties were disclosed.
Here is a suggestion from the Checks and Balances department of duh for the next time you want to quote Ed Ireland:
The Checks & Balances Project suggests a simple question to ask pundits and experts being quoted, cited or published in the media: “Do you get money, directly or indirectly, from interests that stand to benefit from what you are saying?”
You could take their suggestion, or you could practice real journalism using this list of resources for journalists who report on fracking.
Questions:
- Would Mr. Whipple be a source in a story about the environmental impacts from toilet paper production?
- Would you seek ( * )‘s opinion on the latest advances in hemorrhoid surgery?
- They why do you go to fracking’s Joe Camel types like Ed Ireland or Energy In Depth for anything related to fracking?
Now you won’t need to use fracking’s Joe Camel as a source.
Resources for journalists who report on fracking.
About Sharon Wilson
Sharon Wilson is considered a leading citizen expert on the impacts of shale oil and gas extraction. She is the go-to person whether it’s top EPA officials from D.C., national and international news networks, or residents facing the shock of eminent domain and the devastating environmental effects of natural gas development in their backyards.
- Web |
- More Posts(5116)
Would you believe Cap’n Crunch telling you sugar laden cereal is a healthy weight-loss breakfast?
I forgot about Cap’n Crunch! And what about that annoying Leprechaun?
Ah, the Koch brothers. Koch has released beaucoup amounts of carcinogenic benzine over the years. Then, add the failure of Koch Industries to control corrosion on their pipelines has led to many O&G spills, including one that incinerated 2 young people, in front of the father of one of the victims:
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/1998/PAR9802.pdf
But, did the Koch’s even bother to show up at the community of the 2 that died to say they were sorry? Nope, at least inept BP’s CEO’s have gone through those motions a few times, after their disasters.
People living in the Northwest get bombarded by gas propaganda & coal propaganda both so similar……
What a crock!
Anyone wonder why we are now being bombarded with BASF commercials telling us how good chemicals are? No particular branding, just that without chemicals, these products would not exist. Commercials are meant to influence public opinion, what you buy, where you buy it, etc. Why is BASF spending this advertising $, and what is the intent behind their message?
Jana; I think you are probably on to something. BASF is a major polluter on the world stage; but I believe most of their production is still centered in Europe.
If they are spending big ad dollars in your media market …… it might be logical to assume that they have plans …. in and for that market.
Besides; who doesn’t need a new ethylene cracker these days?
(I mean, besides me)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Td0mdCIkFz4&playnext=1&list=PL6D3E707E5760D233&feature=results_video
Not the U.S. version playing in Dallas/Ft Worth now, but I believe this is it. I also found the same one in many different languages. I’ll pass on the ethylene cracker, after all I get my dosage, plus some 24/7, 🙁
However, the industry attempts at spin may not be working across the board:
Tougher Fracking Regulations Backed by 66%, Poll Shows
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-14/tougher-fracking-regulations-backed-by-66-poll-shows.html
“Support for regulation of hydraulic fracturing has increased in the past three months, a sign that the gas-drilling practice is facing greater public scrutiny.
A Bloomberg National Poll found that 66 percent of Americans want more government oversight of the process, known as fracking, in which water, chemicals and sand are shot underground to free gas trapped in rock. That’s an increase from 56 percent in a September poll. The poll found 18 percent favored less regulation, down from 29 percent three months ago. “