Topic
PR pro Jim Hoggan picks a fight with the climate change deniers.
Hoggan: When PR becomes 'propaganda.' Photo by Sarah Race.
Jim Hoggan sees the human race being herded toward doom by villains within his own industry. Hoggan, one of B.C.'s top public relations pros, has made it his mission to blow the whistle on other PR firms, the ones paid big money to convince the public that global climate change is no big deal. To that end, he founded a buzz-generating web site called DeSmogBlog, which regularly debunks climate change "skeptics" and identifies the spinners spreading their message.
If some call him a traitor to his tribe, it won't keep Hoggan up at night, judging from the blistering "manifesto" he published on DeSmogBlog: "It is infuriating -- as a public relations professional -- to watch my colleagues use their skills, their training and their considerable intellect to poison the international debate on climate change. That's what is happening today, and I think it's a disgrace…"
Clients of James Hoggan and Associates include the University of British Columbia, GRVD, David Suzuki Foundation, Concord Pacific, Canadian Pacific Railway, ALCAN, BC Hydro and Ethical Funds. For that group, Hoggan has been trying to figure out what the public knows and is willing to do about creating a more eco-friendly economy. He calls this "the biggest piece of public opinion research ever conducted in Canada on sustainability."
Among the findings: people want business to engage in more environmentally sustainable practices, but when businesses actually do, the public is unlikely to believe it. People also want government to take a firmer hand in regulating industry to promote more sustainable practices. Even some corporate leaders would welcome such regulations, he says, because it would create "a level playing field" for companies already striving, and voluntarily paying the price, to be more environmentally friendly.
In a recent interview with The Tyee (listen here), here is what Jim Hoggan had to say:
On fighting 'PR pollution':
The DeSmogBlog is a news and information blog that is aimed at clearing up the PR pollution around climate change. There is a well-orchestrated campaign taking place in Canada, the United States and Europe that is actually designed to slow down public understanding of climate change. And there are people, mainly people who are getting paid by oil and coal interests, and [some] who are just basically ideologues, who are trying to confuse the public about climate change.
On whether climate change deserves 'debate':
Basically there is a scientific consensus on climate change that has concluded that CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing and it is actually causing an increase in the average temperature of the earth. And that a lot of that CO2 is caused by human activity, mainly burning fossil fuels.
An editor at Science magazine...looked back over 10 years to see how many peer-reviewed papers had been written on this consensus on climate change, and how many of these peer-reviewed papers had actually criticized this consensus. She found about 1000 papers, peer-reviewed papers, and she couldn't find one that questioned the scientific consensus on climate change. So the perception that there is actually a scientific debate, particularly a healthy debate, is totally wrong.
Now, there is a lot of debate about what the eventual impact on the environment will be. Around the world, some of the most sophisticated computers that have ever been built are doing this climate impact calculation right now. And some of the outcomes are quiet frightening, others aren't, but there is no doubt among the world's major scientific academies that the climate is changing. It's being caused by human activity, and the consequences of that are going to be serious.
On why the scientific consensus isn't reflected in the news media:
[That] is a testament to the power of public relations. Most people have heard it said that you shouldn't believe everything you read in the newspaper. Well, let me tell you, if you've spent your time with PR people, you'd feel that very, very strongly. Most public relations people spend far more time on a story than a reporter can. And many of those stories, particularly as they relate to climate change, are manufactured, basically. There is actually a group of people who are out there trying to confuse the public about climate change, and they are very skilful at it. These people are good communications people.
There is no question that the media is manipulated [on various issues] on a daily basis. But I don't think there are very many examples of this scale of manipulation. This is a very, very high-level kind of manipulation. It almost moves beyond public relations into an area I would call propaganda.
On how PR pros live with themselves after accepting big cheques for helping to bamboozle us into sealing our own doom:
It's a good question, and I wouldn't pretend to have the answer to it, but money and ideology are blinding. And I think when you have an ideologue, they are apt to believe anything. And money certainly helps people justify even the wildest kinds of statements. The fact is that, regardless of what their motives are, what they are doing is misleading people.
On why people say they are for sustainability, but don't live it:
I think what they're saying is, why should I be the chump? Why should I be the person who does everything right when nearly everyone else doesn't? They know the big impact on the environment isn't coming necessarily from them, but it's coming from lack of government policies, lack of real government regulations and changes in the way we go about structuring the economy.
Probably the most interesting question in our research was: "Why is it that you don't behave more sustainably?" People said the first reason was that there is a lack of government leadership. The second answer was, "I need more information."
Then if you ask the same people, "Why is it that other Canadians don't act more sustainably?" the first reason they give is the same: lack of government leadership. But the second reason is: "Other Canadians don't care."
To me, what it says is that people, outside their small circle of friends and family, just don't trust other Canadians. The public's mistrust in corporate Canada is at an all-time high as it relates to environmental issues. There is a similar mistrust of politicians and government.
When you get a serious problem like energy efficiency in automobiles, and you have the government coming out with a memorandum of understanding that basically says it's going to place voluntary regulations instead of mandatory regulations with penalties that would require the automobile industry in Canada to increase fuel efficiency by a certain period by a certain time, people see through that. They just see the government kind of backing away from its responsibility and just playing politics. And they see it in everything from fisheries to forestry to air quality to water quality.
So people understand that. People don't want to be the only ones [to do something] because they realize that they're not enough.
On the economic damage climate change deniers do:
The real shame here is that there is a huge opportunity for Canadian business to be a leader in the world in clean technology. We are in a privileged position in the world, and these folks are standing in the way of the kinds of political changes and public policy changes that have to be put in place for us to realize the opportunity that we have.
Spin is a lot less expensive than change when it comes to climate change. Hiring a PR firm or creating a PR department and paying it lots of money is much less expensive than increasing energy efficiency in fleets of automobiles, or changing the type of fuel that you're using, or developing alternative types of fuel.
On whether the climate change deniers will win (meaning we'll all lose):
I'm quite an optimistic kind of person, and I think that there are enough folks out there trying to point this thing out that people will figure it out. What I'm worried about is how long it takes.
In the end you can't spin Mother Nature. But with this kind of stalling that is going on, it may end up biting us in a way that we don't want.
Business and government are the two institutions that are going to do something about this; it's not environmental groups. There needs to be big changes in government policy and legislation, in the way we run our economy. There needs to be changes in the way the business world works, and the public needs to demand it.
And I think that anything that stands in the way of the public understanding what this problem is, is slowing down that process. Because in the end it's public demand that's going to change business, that's going to change government.
On whether he's treated as the enemy within PR circles:
You know, I don't get that at all. I get people in my industry saying "good on ya." There are a lot of people in my business who do great work. We represent children's hospitals. We represent all sorts of important issues. We work for Greenpeace. We work for the Red Cross. There are communications people who work for organizations all over the world that are doing great things socially and environmentally.
But there is also a bad element, and I think a particularly bad element.
And so I think there are a lot of people in my industry who appreciate the fact that somebody is standing up and saying what I'm saying, because they don't like being associated with these people. I want to put as much distance between me as a public relations person, and these people, as I possibly can. And I know there are a lot of my peers who feel exactly the same.
On whether he worries about being taken to court by powerful interests trying to shut him up:
I'd welcome it. Any opportunity there is to get the truth out on the table, I think is a good opportunity.
DeSmogBlog, co-edited by Kevin Grandia and Sarah Pullman, can be found here. Listen to a full podcast of the interview on the blog, here.
David Beers is founding editor of The Tyee.
Related Tyee stories: Brian Toth zeroed in on global warming's impact on B.C. salmon; Donald Gutstein traced the roots of the 'Global Warming Denial Lobby'; and Crawford Kilian observed that 'Climate Change is Easy, Culture Change is Hard.' ![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
70
Login or register to post comments
Capitalism
6 years ago
Comments on "'You Can't Spin Mother Nature'"
Pollution is out of control and global warming is a reality. However, I learned some very interesting information the other day...
Specifically, the sun is getting hotter....the sun is a star, which continues to mature. As it does, its temperature fluctuates. Currently, we are going through a period of rapidly increasing temperatures....
This is proven. So is the fact that the earth is warming. So, the issue is what degree of warming is attributable to the sun heating and what portion is attributable to green house gasses.
I don't know, but it doesn't take an idiot to know that each is having an impact.
Unfortunately, the FAR left has taken this over as its issue. There is a lot of misinformation being spread.
Grumpy
6 years ago
PR outfits are nothing more than proffessional liars, kept in business largely by dishonest governments and corporations.
In the UK, a group trying to promote LRT got so frustrated with all the nonsense spouted by a PR firm, they took them to court for slander and they won!
In Europe PR groups must now prove their outrageous statements with fact or face the full force of the law!
Maybe we should do the same here?
ubiquitous
6 years ago
Oh capi/maybelle, do you care to provide some sources for you little bit of learning? You're falling into the trap that most (if not all) global warming deniers have set. That is, attributing temperature fluctuations to natural causes. The earth's temperatures have always fluctuated - this much is true. However, these natural fluctuations have been minimal - not the rate of fluctuation that we see today. Also, during those periods of more dramatic temperature fluctuations have coincided with significant environmental events; such as the ending of an ice age. So, it begs the question, what significant event occurred that could be attributed to the climate changes that we're experiencing today? I leave you to figure this one out.
And then you blame it on the lefties who have hijacked this issue. I'm still wondering what the conspiracy behind caring for the planet is - perhaps in your infinite wisdom you could shed some light on this (some of us have asked your buddies to elaborate, but as of yet, I still haven't seen a well thought out answer). Last time I checked capi, it (caring for the planet) didn't have a lot of shareholder value.
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/pdf/TAR-02.PDF
jwstewart
6 years ago
CAPITALism
The sun's irradiance is fairly easily measured, and in fact composes a small % of the temperature increase. 20% or less in fact.
That means 80% of global warming is due to evil capitalists poluting the environment.
Willson said that most researchers expect greenhouse gases to warm the planet by 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit in the next 100 years. Solar irradiance could add another 0.72 degrees F ... he said.
Jeffrey J.
6 years ago
David, way to go! A great scoop; a great interview. This is a significant and telling interview from someone who really knows the PR business. And if Mr. Hoggan says that PR has turned into propaganda, you know it's very worrisome. I'll be putting his website on my favorites bar right now. It is very heartening to see someone like Mr. Hoggan step forward and join the ranks of the other professionals who are finally speaking out against the manipulation of public information.
Steve P
6 years ago
Don't forget the evil commies =^)
Even if human-induced climate change is true (which I believe it is), the green movement is certainly not above its own propagandizing -- I have read many older, less reliable green studies from the 70's predicting doom that didn't pan out the way it was predicted. This is not a simply matter of truth-telling greens vs. the industrialist propagandists.
Nevertheless, I was pleased to read this article. Why does the public distrust government and large businesses? Perhaps because of the history of inethical practice in the PR industry?
Capitalism
6 years ago
jwstewart:
If that is the case, then thanks for informing me. I am very concerned about global warming, especially if it impacts my ski season!
I am not trying to discredit the left, per say, I am merely saying that many on the left are using global warming as a ploy to put the breaks on capitalism.
You must admit, that many on the left resent wealth, nice cars and big houses. Business is clearly the engine behind greenhouse gases and these people hate businesses.
All I will say is that I have yet to read something from an objective party. This PR guy will do anything to get paid, and clearly Mr. Suzuki is as biased as they come.
I really don't understand the sciences behind global warming, and nobody on this board can say they do. I am not a scientist. I have read several opinions from journalists, who again are not scientists. Take the writer of this article for example, I am sure he hasn't studied any science beyond grade 12 chemistry. Journalists are writers, not experts - especially surrounding topics like this.
I can only say that I have read what journalists have to say about my industry, and most of the time, they are way off base....
G West
6 years ago
Capitalism/Maybelle
Could you possibly be any more shallow?
ubiquitous
6 years ago
I am merely saying that many on the left are using global warming as a ploy to put the breaks on capitalism.
ubiquitous
6 years ago
oops, hit the "post" button a little early.
Or, many on the left are actually concerned for the environment beyond concern over the ski the season.
Or, many on the left believe that from our rampant consumerism stems environmental degradation, global inequalities, child labour practices, etc.
G West
6 years ago
Cappy/Maybelle:
It's not up to me to shill for David Beers. You might want to look at the following though, before you decide there's anything wrong with the journalism he's provided in the account of his interview with Hoggan, above.
David Beers is founding editor of The Tyee. He was senior editor at Mother Jones magazine before moving to Vancouver in 1991. Since then, he has won national awards for his journalism in Canada and the United States, writing for The Globe and Mail, Vancouver Magazine, The New York Times Magazine, Harper's, National Geographic and many other publications. During a three years stint at the Vancouver Sun he edited the “Fate of the Strait†environmental series, recipient of Canada’s National Newspaper Award for Special Projects; invented and edited the cultural section Mix; served as Chief Features Editor and wrote a weekly essay on social and political issues.
He is author of Blue Sky Dream, a memoir of growing up in Cold War California suburbia. He is a founding member of IMPACS, a Vancouver non-profit firm providing media help to non-profit groups, former vice chair of the Vancouver City Planning Commission, and a lecturer at the UBC School of Journalism.
I'd say he's very credible and, if you look again at the actual material above, he lets Hoggan do the talking for the most part. The problem with you, as your swipe at David Suzuki proves, you think this is an issue where there are two sides. It isn't, and there aren't - sadly. If we weren't in such a mess - as accepted by virtually every credible scientist (even the ones Bush has cajoled into lying for him)- then we could go on with this debate. In the event, your smoke screen and dissembling is just making things worse.
Maybe you can take up water skiing!
You should read Beers' book btw, it’s not bad - and he's certainly not paying me to say that.
jtothemfk
6 years ago
capitalism writes,
I've read a lot of inanities coughed up by the neocons and apologists for consumptive captitalism on these posts. The s**t puked up by capitalism ranks high (or low).
In more ways than can be counted, capitalism (the ideology, not the poster) is responsible for massive environmental degradation, massive pollution and production of CO2. This much is admitted by Capitalism. So, doorknob, global warming is not being "used as a ploy"; there is, rather, a direct and discernible, a measurable relationship between the one and the other.
And as for your "these people hate businesses" comment... please, explain yourself. I'm waiting with baited breath.
Gloomy
6 years ago
Capitalism
It is good to hear you saying that you do not understand.
My question is: why are you contributing then?
jtothemfk
6 years ago
Thanks to Beers and Jim Hoggan, and others like Mr. Hoggan. Please continue your fine work.
jwstewart
6 years ago
Capiptalism:
You must admit, that many on the left resent wealth, nice cars and big houses. Business is clearly the engine behind greenhouse gases and these people hate businesses.
Maybe you are mis-interpreting something.
Maybe people on the left are trying to put the brakes on global warming and as a result need to halt capitalism as it's cause.
The alternative is a form of capitalism that doesn't cause greenhouse gases. It would therefor behoove capitalists not to cause GHG, otherwise their investment will be lost, making them very second-rate capitalists.
aspergerian
6 years ago
The phrase "anti-public relations" is more accurate than "public relations". Additional information about spinning science on behalf of investors is presented in the books "Toxic sludge is good for you" and "Trust Us, We're Experts". The phrase "manufacturing uncertainty" also reflects the efforts of hirelings subservient to investors in toxins.
Teresa
Capitalism
6 years ago
Maybe, though I doubt it. I am sure that 15 years ago, when global warming was less of an issue - you all used another issue to advace your socialistic cause. This board is full of comments which reject any type of economic advancement.
I discovered this site about 6 months ago, and have had the opportunity to read a lot of posts. Some insightful, some garbage. Go through the archive of articles and read some of the comments. You'll see a lot of contempt for corporations and businesspeople. I presume many of these people have been "left behind".
As far as Mr. Suzuki and other environmentalists - they hate business, this is fact. Their concerns are real. As we grow, we consume more of our planet. These people care little about the economy, but care about sustainability.
Economic activity has led to clearcutting, pollution and extinction of several species. I have heard Suzuki speak - he hates the corporation!
Capitalism brings many evils, but we as a society are starting to care. Businesses will ultimately adjust to meet the needs of society.
The left has absolutely hi-jacked this issue and is exploiting it. Their first objective is equality of wealth, services and less work to achieve both. Man is eroding the environment, and it is easy for them to point to the environment to slow down development!!!
The left has been trumpeting their crap for hundreds of years. Only recently has the environment captured their attention...
G West
6 years ago
Oh Really! More words of wisdom from Maybelle
The 'left' is a product of the late 19th century. The crap that was being spouted prior to the popular revolutions of the late 18th century had nothing to do with the left and a lot to do with ending the hegemony of the divine right of kings.
Not very different from the whining of capitalists like you trying to hang onto your stolen wealth - just like divinely appointed kings.
Still, like most things you write, that comment shows how truly ignorant you actually are.
What business are you in? I may just decide to open up some competition - with people like you in the industry I figure I could dominate it in the space of five years: Especially if you continue to waste your extra cash in Vegas and because you clearly have no understanding of tax policy or actually saving money.
Rest easy in the false comfort that the 'left' has hijacked this issue. Unfortunately, somebody has to save the world you live in too - although you really don't deserve it.
As to garbage posted on this site, I can assure you that between 75 and 80% of what you post would fall into that category. You're actually a tiny bit more sensible than IAMC but I know that's not saying much.
How much you actually care about the environment was illustrated by your opening words this morning - about how you care about global warming because it might affect your skiing.
What a goof! I don't think David Suzuki or anyone else hates business, qua business - we do dislike liars.
freebear
6 years ago
PR is also about promotion. Promotion of an idea, but more often than not a product that you are urged to consume. Of course media is relatively silent on the issue because they sell ad space, be it t.v. radio, newsprint, website, and so on.
Doing something about climate change will affect consumption, thus profit, thus advertising profit. Look at the Vancouver Sun's Friday edition-two sections on cars and driving. How many car review shoes are there-with often the only criticism being the cup holder is too small!
PR!
Products that are new and approved! Why was the previous verion of the product old and shi.ty!?
freebear
6 years ago
Oops!
I meant to type "products that are new and improved...............! (curse my typing skills!)
Promotion, like becoming more sustainable! You either are sustainable or you are not. You can not be 'more' sustainable!
Coyote
6 years ago
Which is another example of SteveP's mugwamp politics. (Mug on one side of the fence and his wamp on the other.) He ever genuflects left while kissing the ass of the right.
Cute politics and a phony objectivity, that winds up like a race car on the racetrack with its rear end jacked up, spinning its wheels madly, but going absolutely nowhere. Only the driver doesn't seem to know it, all hunched over very earnestly behind the steering wheel, looking earnestly forward. :-)
Better he takes up ballroom dancing, where he can spin around on his tippy-toes to his hearts content and actually be doing something.
Fii
6 years ago
As a "leftie", I would suggest Capitalism just take a look for himself... I camped up at Joffre Lakes, under Matier Glaciar, last weekend; just sat there next to my tent with my dog, gazing at this massive (shrinking) chunk of ice and thinking about how these incredible things called glaciars are rapidly disappearing all over the world.
I don't resent "wealth, nice cars and big houses"- I just have no use for them. It's that simple. My 20-yr old Tercel (about to get air-cared, don't worry :) got me up there- and my pup tent was as good as any palace up among that fantastic natural scenery.
Truman Green
6 years ago
Not shilling?--probably not, G.West, but still and all, I bet Mr. Beers is a wee bit embarrassed by your unsolicited public relations.
I happen to think humans are contributing to global warming in a big way, but only because I actually understand a lot of the science re. how CO2, nitrous oxide and methane--even ozone contribute to it. But for those who don't it's really a matter of faith--faith in those scientists whom we chose to believe.
So it's still best to have all the sides of the question debated--deniers included.
I also believe that about 75% of all medical science is corrupt--paid for and bought by self-interested pharmaceutical companies, who own the scientists along with their clinical trials and research--and that a similar percentage of medications are (funny how "is" is proper grammer, but sounds weird, eh) absolutley useless, not to mention harmful. In otherwords, I'm a denialist.
It's never a good idea to shut down debate about any issue--scientific or not.
I believe that conventional science is correct in concluding that human activity is speeding up the natural process (the greenhouse effect) by which the earth is warmed--without which our habitation around here would be impossible. But to merely assume it's true because it's conventional wisdom, might be an dangerous game.
I'm sure you recall the Copernicus story, not to mention Gallileo. Even as recent as twenty years ago all doctors thought peptic ulcers were caused by stress. Now they know that helicobacter pylorus causes 80 to 90 percent of them.
So much for conventional wisdom!
Chris Bouris
6 years ago
The greatest falsehood put out by the "same-old" fossil fuel PR lobby, with its irrational proponents on forums and "official" media, is the argument that enviornmental standards and true cost accounting metrics are "bad for business", and just delusional complaining of "Left" (tm) who are supposedly "anti-business" (tm).
In plain fact, the very opposite is true - sustainable technologies are much more pro business - by far: more local good paying jobs get created, a diversity of local businesses develop and profit alongside - along with the workforce, plus the tax base stays local.
In Europe - the fastest growing business sector, after I.T. (Information Technologies) is the renewables business sector.
Logjam 603
6 years ago
Kyoto . the UN's "Money for paper Credits ponzi scheme.
please go take an intro Climatology course and throw in one on Glaciology as well. The sky isn't falling, the planet warms up & cools down regardless of what we do.
Ya can't spin Mother Nature, but bullshit baffles brains nine times out of ten
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19025574.000-kyoto-promises-are-nothing-but-hot-air.html
Kyoto promises are nothing but hot air
* 22 June 2006
* NewScientist.com news service
* Fred Pearce
Printable version Email to a friend RSS Feed
China's mystery blip
Enlarge image
China's mystery blip
MANY governments, including some that claim to be leading the fight against global warming, are harbouring a dirty little secret. These countries are emitting far more greenhouse gas than they say they are, a fact that threatens to undermine not only the shaky Kyoto protocol but also the new multibillion-dollar market in carbon trading.
Under Kyoto, each government calculates how much carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide its country emits by adding together estimated emissions from individual sources. These so-called "bottom-up" estimates have long been accepted by atmospheric scientists, even though they have never been independently audited.
Now two teams that have monitored concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere say they have convincing evidence that the figures reported by many countries are wrong, especially for methane. Among the worst offenders are the UK, which may be emitting 92 per cent more methane than it declares under the Kyoto protocol, and France, which may be emitting 47 per cent more.
“The worst offenders are the UK and France, which may be emitting far more methane than they declare under Kyotoâ€
Peter Bergamaschi of the European Commission Joint Research Centre at Ispra, Italy, used an alternative "top-down" technique to study emissions across Europe. His technique is to measure in detail how concentrations of greenhouse gases vary across the globe. Levels are generally higher near major sources such as industrial centres, and when weather conditions trap the pollution. They are lower near natural "sinks" such as cold areas of ocean. Concentrations can also vary widely depending on factors such as the weather. Over London, for example, methane levels vary from 1800 parts per billion (ppb), the global background level, on windy days to upwards of 3000 ppb when local emissions from landfills and gas pipelines are trapped by cold night air.
By measuring these differences and tracking air movements, the scientists say they can calculate a country's emissions independently of government estimates. Bergamaschi's calculations suggest that the UK emitted 4.21 million tonnes of methane in 2004 compared to the 2.19 million tonnes it declared, while France emitted 4.43 million tonnes compared to the 3.01 million tonnes it declared. Methane is an extremely powerful greenhouse gas. While it persists in the atmosphere for only one-tenth as long as CO2, its immediate warming effect, tonne for tonne, is around 100 times greater. According to some estimates, methane is responsible for a third of current global warming, and reductions in methane emissions may be the quickest and cheapest way of slowing climate change.
read the rest . . . .
G West
6 years ago
So alberta jammer, have you figured out how to get all the cows to stop farting?
When are you organizing the meat and dairy boycott?
More smoke and mirror excuses for doing nothing.
jesterjogger
6 years ago
I thought we had agreed not to engage ignorant morons.
-30-
6 years ago
Although I believe human activity is causing global warming I have no problem reading alternate views. Those that believe global warming to be a myth don't control the media or restrict opposing views. Debate is good. Newspapers editors in Vancouver assume global warming as a given and run opposing views only because they are so different from mainstream thought, as in the man bites dog story. The stories are amusements for the reader.
G West
6 years ago
sorry jester - couldn't help myself!
rlauriston
6 years ago
Is the climate changing? Pictures are worth lots of words +-1000
http://nsidc.org/data/glacier_photo/special_collection.html
And even if the burning of fossil fuels isn't a major contributor to global warming, it is still introducing many toxic elements into our environment - the air we breath.
Let's go to a user pay system by requiring that vehicle exhaust be circulated directly into the driver/passenger compartment of every vehicle. I hope the point is taken.
Read about swarms of locusts. Human beings are the locusts of the planet. Read about the ingenuity gap. I don't know if we can reach any public concensus leading to a political will to do the best thing. (It's hard to say the right thing, since too many people equate moral/public interest right and wrong with the political duality of Left and Rght.)
Makes you really wonder if people care what they leave to their children. As a species, we really haven't gotten that far out of the trees when it comes to acting outside of our own immediate personal desires.
IAMC
6 years ago
Blaming humans for global warming is fa from a slam dunk argument. Anyone who has followed this debate knows this.
But it is a good issue for the left to grab. It fits in with their mistrust of corporations, capitalism, conservatives and all the other boogeymen.
Mann's hockey stick has been debunked, all be it with complete resistance from some.
We simply do not know enough to wildly go off creating economy breaking policies, that are ineffective and unnecessary.
Thank God Harper got us out of Kyoto. We can do a better job ourselves of developing sustainable environmental policies.
Why are we rushing into a panic attack, because Al Gore says so.
This PR tactic by the socialists won't work. People are not as stupid as they think.
Gloomy
6 years ago
Well you should know about stupid!
Your entire post is stupid.
chuckstraight
6 years ago
Al Gore is a Socialist? Ha Ha
G West
6 years ago
I thought capitalists liked a challenge. Most of these guys think they are competitive geniuses. I thing they should have their bluff called. No more tax holidays, no more handouts and no more damn pollution. Either clean up their act or they're out of business.
Let’s see if they really do have the jam to be real competitors and responsible citizens. It's time for business and industry to put up or shut up and stop making excuses. You can't expect sociopaths to develop a social conscience so they will have to be forced to do it and the sooner the better.
This has nothing to do with socialism - it's about survival.
IAMC
6 years ago
G
You are making sense now.
You know that competition drives innovation. This is a positive thing.
Thanks for pointing that out to the viewers.
Our industrialists will do the right thing using innovation tailored to their obligations to perpetuate our stringent environmental regulations.
To say that you might not survive ? Well you don't seem that unconscious, so I take it with a grain of salt.
There is money out there right now. We should out there fishing.
G West
6 years ago
IAMC
You wouldn't like the kind of rules I'd promulgate. Moreover, neither would industry or business:
1) No more V8 engines, no more private vehicles (cars) weighing more than one tonne net vehicle weight.
2) Every private vehicle driving into the downtown of every city would carry a chip which, when the vehicle crossed an electronic line on the way would generate a charge of $10.00 for that day's access to the city core.
3) Parking fees and fines to double every 2 years for the next decade.
4) Gas prices raised immediately to $2.50 per litre and 50c each year thereafter until a pump price of $5/ litre is reached. Additional funds generated to go directly to efficient and free light rapid transit.
5) Get all the big diesel transport rigs off the roads and put all freight back on the trains - where it belongs.
6) A 100% increase in royalties paid by producers of oil from the tar sands to go immediately and directly into cleaning up CO2 emissions from Alberta.
7) Immediate adoption of a new tax policy whereby all income - dividends, interest, employment, gambling and lottery winnings, capital gains (everything but the sale of one (1) family home no more often than once every five years) amd inheritance income - is treated the same for taxation purposes.
8) No more help for corporations in terms of accelerated tax write offs, sweetheart property tax deals.
9) Executive remuneration at the highest level will never exceed ten times the average industrial wage. Employee share ownership will be restricted to nominal levels for all employees, including those in the executive suite.
10) All private pension plans will be fully funded and administered by an independent professional body.
And that's just a start. It's time to put a little equity and justice back into a corrupt system that favours corporate power at the expense of individuals, families and the environment.
Capitalism
6 years ago
G West:
I am not sure what type of society you are trying to promote, but what I see in your vision is nothing short of communism. Do you wish to revert us to the early 1900's?
I understand that you represent the FAR, FAR left, but your recommendations are laughable. You would absolutely cripple the economy and destroy the incentives to work hard and profit.
It scares me that there are people out there like you....
G West
6 years ago
Cappy/Maybelle
I thought you capitalists were real competitors and willing to use their talents to rise to any challenge. I guess that was just talk and you guys can't cope with accepting your share of the responsibility for creating a fair and equitable society unless the system is skewed to your advantage. You want all the rewards of the system but none of the responsibility. Nothing left wing about what I posted – just rules that’ll save the environment and treat everyone equitably.
It scares me that there are people out there like you who say one thing but believe something quite different. You couldn't survive without the special deals your bought politicians are delivering for you every day and your comment above proves it.
You love your corporate welfare and you need weaning off it now for your own, and society's good.
doggone
6 years ago
Fiddling while Rome burns:
We are all responsible (except for those who REALLY can not afford to change - but they do not read or contribute to this forum) so I ask myself: "What am I doing about "global warming"?
1) Read and occassionaly comment on Thetyee content
2) Worry all the time
3) Try to imagine how I could maintain my lifestyle using less (non-renewable)energy
Conclusions:
1) Whether weather is changing due to my behaviour or not it has changed dramatically and observably in my 50+ years
2) We are all "in the same boat" so left,right,rich,middle class,poor,governed and governor sink or sail on together
3) Leaders in government, business and information distribution are doing "the best they can" with the hand they were dealt - so are you and I
What now?
woody
6 years ago
G West why didn’t you include all the unnecessary flying and jet setters in your wish list, as Jet and lead fueled planes are as bad or worse polluters than automobiles,( I won’t mention the poisonous virtues of de-iceing of planes), probably 95% of flyers have no purposeful reason to fly other than for fun in the sun or simply because they can, flyers should be the first ones hit with your $5 per liter tax.
G West
6 years ago
Cappy
Further, many European countries do just fine with systems not all that different from what I've described. The US taxes lottery and gambling winnings. $5 /litre gas is not unknown and London England charges vehicles every time they enter the downtown area.
G West
6 years ago
Fine with me woody. My list was not meant to be exclusive - as long as the railways respond by bringing back reasonable and affordable passenger service city to city and all across the country then I think we could live with that too.
Lots of opportunities for capitalist investment and reward there too.
gkam
6 years ago
I am alternately amused and frightened by those like IAMC and Capitalism, who seem to revel in the Reagan Syndrome - believing what you want, because it's convenient, profitable or because it conforms to personal prejudice.
Those who warn about global climate change are professionals who spent their lives studying it, with peer-reviewed research and analysis. Those who oppose it do so from political prejudice, often personal, often because it might threated their money.
So, who has the credibility? With a Master of Science in Environmental Management, I find myself debating those who argue based on personal/political prejudice and technical ignorance, . . you know, . . like some in this thread. But somehow, they seem to think their arguments have equal weight with others based on substantial evidence and analysis.
We will never be free of those who structure their reality based on selfishness and rationalize any destructive acts committed for personal profit.
woody
6 years ago
G WEST I agree 100% with you on the use of trains for the movement of people and freight, with the cost of asphalt hitting $100's per ton this is very real possibility.
freebear
6 years ago
Oh now those who want sustainable societies and ways of life by demanding corporate and individual change are communists!
What will you call Russia using energy as negotiating tool to propser their country, governmnet and businesses?
Communists?
The deluded or blind growth at all costs bunch are Laughable!
Gloomy
6 years ago
G West.
I will go along with your rules, as long as the military will stop wasting rescources!
Yes that goes for our beloved "flypast" of military jets that should have been in a museum ages ago.
Also I want to see all races involving fossil-fuel driven engines to be banned!
It is time that we stop wasting rescources to "entertain" a bunch of Yahoooos!
skeptikool
6 years ago
I'm am as convinced that global warming is a serious and growing problem, as I am, that the reference to "junk science" is put forward frequently to stifle debate.
How genuine is our concern, however, when we feel that our own ox is being gored?
I ask this because, today, reviews of the documentary Who killed the electric car appeared in my two major B.C. dailies. It occurred that to be in support of electric cars might make one appear to be against those many workers in the auto industry. Not so in my case! The technology is inevitable and I think the industry and its workers should get on board.
When one of the reviewers writes of, ..."myriad forces to inhibit progress and maintain the status quo." I don't doubt that she includes the Auto Workers among those forces - though the decisions are not theirs.
I look forward to The Tyee doing its own review and report on that documentary and the lively (I'm sure) discussion that will follow.
Capitalism
6 years ago
G West,
You and all your rules. You expect the government and the like of Carole James to engineer society. The government has no place in our lives, our wallets, our bedrooms.
It is amazing the degree of rules/regulations and control you wish to be subjected to? Where is your entrepreneurial spirit?
I am sorry, but the society you envision is the one that scares me to death. Where would the creativity be? Where would the innovation be?
You can't force things down peoples throats. We are entitled to freedom and liberty!
Guys like you want to put up fences, I want to bring them down!!!
G West
6 years ago
Cappy/Maybelle
What do you think you have been doing with your phony claims about competitiveness and liking a challenge? That was all crap wasn’t it?
You are as phony as a three dollar bill and you're afraid of adopting an equitable system that doesn't give you the continuing advantages of corporate welfare. All of which you can’t deny and all of which you revel in every time you head for Vegas on another junket.
If you were a real entrepreneur you'd rise to the challenge - but you're not, You're a whiner and a complainer and you don't believe in real equity or real justice.
Thanks for proving it. You want to continue to live behind the protection of government erected fences, unfair tax legislation and irresponsible public policy - not me. You don't have liberty now because you are a captive of your own lies and your attitude proves it.
Never once did I mention the NDP. That's your shtick you phony. Naturally you'd be scared. You've never grown up. It's time you did before you and your ilk ruin the world for the rest of us.
ubiquitous
6 years ago
you really lack an imagination maybelle. If you could actaully get past your "damn lefties are ruining everything" cliched mindset, perhaps you'd be taken more seriously.
My question to you is, where are your innovative ideas? With your blind belief in the invisible hand of the free market, I'm starting to believe that you skipped over the Economics 101 text book chapter that discusses market imperfections.
ElminaZ
6 years ago
Interesting article on a PR giant who is determined to spin himself.
As someone who works in PR, I find it somewhat demeaning that he would take it upon himself to slay others in his own industry.
[portion edited. please refrain from publishing unsubstantiated 'rumours' in posts. -- Tyee editor]
Also, while I generally respect David Beers' pieces, this story sounds a bit scripted.
In non-profit circles, James' agency is known for jumping on the bandwagon of causes to seek publicity not necessarily for the benefit of their cause, but for his own agency to toot their horn.
I don't think he's evil. His viewpoints on climate change may be valid. But I could do w/o the pomp and circumstance.
Certainly a man who has so many years of PR experience should understand that he can be just as powerful pushing buttons on the inside, instead of blowing his megaphone every which way.
Capitalism
6 years ago
ubiquitous,
i think you will have seen that i have acknoweldged many imperfections of the free market. it isn't perfect, it isn't even close...
however, it is far better than any other system ever employed. it is certainly better than the economic hole that is created when socialistic/idealistic policies (like those trumpeted by G West) are implemented.
this especially in light of the fact that businesses are mobile and we have economic juggernauts on all sides of us...
i learned from the 90s - it appears as if though you haven't...
gkam
6 years ago
That's ridiculous. You want to own everything you can get your hands on, . . then, you'll fence it off to keep the rest of us out.
Monetizing everything is a really stupid idea, ranking all earthly goods in an invented value system, at the mercy of capricious whim, overarching greed, great vision, or stupidity and short-sightedness, whose main underlying theme, and greatest concern, is selfishness.
Alcibiades
6 years ago
Maybelle,
If you actually had done some research into the matter of tax equity and fairness you might know that the Carter Royal Commission on Taxation was appointed by a Progressive Conservative government under John Diefenbaker in 1962.
Instead of actually trying to learn something about how the unfairness and inequity of the system Kenneth Carter described when he tabled his report in 1966 in 6 volumes you assume that anyone who wants to make our tax system fairer and to impart justice to the economic relations in our society is an NDPer or a socialist.
Like the business lobbyists and the big banks that put on a full court press before the Pearson/Trudeau government finally developed their white paper with some very tepid and partial reforms in 1967 - you are so completely compromised in the way you plead for a continuation of the current increasingly unfair tax system in this country.
You might want to drop back and reconsider some of the things you wrote above before you reveal even more clearly how ignorant and how totally unaware of the real situation you actually are.
Capitalism
6 years ago
Alcibiades:
I could care less about what a bunch tax reforms in the 60s. That is nearly 50 years ago.
All I know is that we pay too much tax......today! The 60s were a different era.
Alcibiades
6 years ago
Baloney! You pay far too little tax and you know nothing about tax policy and its effects either.
You know nothing and you care less. Why would anyone be surprised about that? You don't remember what you said yesterday let alone understand how we got in the mess we're in today.
jwstewart
6 years ago
Capitalism;
I think you are mistaken if you beleive our industrialists will adapt and solve the climate change problem.
You see, the fundamental cause of global warming is
of fuel for building heat and vehicle transportation.
The solution is to use heating and transportation methods the do not
. Like Solar heat, geothermal heat, etc. What will happen to the Natural Gas companies ? They will disappear along with everyones gas bill.
What NG company is going to support it's own going out of business ?
Certainly not the on you own shares in, if they are willing to gas up dive bombers to keep their business going.
freebear
6 years ago
Thaqi is why nothing will happen until the crises (sp? plural). Our whole way of life assumes the growth of consumption-whether it is fossil energy, or smarties!
Mink
6 years ago
Gkam has hit the nail on the head, I think, therefore how do we limit or ameliorate the outcomes these with sociopathic tendancies create?
I have to assume that CAPITALISM and IACM are those propagandists employed by the fudge factories to say ridiculous neocon dogma so the rest of us will spend our energies responding to them. They are too convenient a target to be real. It's that or they are pimply-faced teenagers in West Vancouver parroting their CEO daddies dinner conversations. I think one of the blind spots of neocons is that they are so busy with selfish little schemes that they assume the rest of us are up to the same crap. We aren't but we do suffer the consequences of this paranoid delusion.
What I hear in CAPPY's posts is fear of not being able to adjust to the changes coming. If you do fear change, then you should be very very afraid.....
Thanks for the link to the glacier photos rlauriston. Very revealing and undeniable.
http://nsidc.org/data/glacier_photo...collection.html
Nationalist
6 years ago
Have a look at this Video.
click here
talks about some of this PR spin type stuff, very good clip. its a short film won't take much of your attention.
Nationalist
6 years ago
err sorry,, click here http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=674054406&Mytoken=C1F339D7-1417-FD4C-53C879CF9A2D0BDB70775802
DevilsAdvocate
6 years ago
The real problem with all these comments in my opinion is the mixing up of anti-capitalism with environmentalism. Capitalism has repeatedly been accused of being inherently unsustainable, and extensive research has been dismissed because of this accusation.
There are many thinkers out there, one of the most prominent being Paul Hawken, that investigate sustainable capitalism. There may be some social injustices inherent in capitalism, but please do not mix these up with environmental issues. The act of attacking corporations and industry is certainly not encouraging said corporations and industry to listen. They're not stupid, they are also not inherently evil. If you cast them as such, do not expect them to listen.
I found this article quite interesting, as it exposes some of the spin behind the global warming issues. The world of PR is very fascinating, and it's important to try and get your news from as many different sources as possible. But don't mix this article up with the scientific reasoning behind global warming, it is merely a look at some of the PR behind the issue. If you're looking for scientific reasoning there is extensive publishing by many prominent scientists.
These arguments so often turn into an emotional battle ground with the demonization of both the left and the right... obviously both defensive for various reasons. It is critical to limit this demonization on environmental issues so that both sides can learn from each other (and yes BOTH sides have a considerable amount to learn, including myself). Social issues are critical, but should be dealt with seperately where possible.
G West
6 years ago
Unless the nature of corporate structure changes, and I don't think it will anytime soon, I think the corporate entity is, at best, amoral. Without some transnational control of corporate activity there is no reason to suspect a positive outcome. I remember a program on Ideas (CBC) some years ago, where the idea of social justice was discussed among a group of corporate types. At the end of the discussion the consensus was that these guys didn't want to hear about it. What they finally said was that they are more than confident of their ability to compete and win in 'any' environment. They just want the rules laid down and then they feel more than capable of beating each other up in order to maintain profitability under whatever regime they are operating. I think changing the rules and the roles of the corporate world is the absolute key when we’re talking about the natural world.
Describe the problem, specify the necessary parameters and let these guys go to work – that seemed to be the general consensus; but don’t expect them to understand and, for God’s sake, don’t ever think they will empathize. They don’t have the equipment – that’s why they are successful corporate leaders (when they are not getting caught in one or another kind of fraud and/or theft.
I think the environmental situation is another case like social justice. Government and opinion makers need to be as tough and clear as possible. Business will thrive and use its success as just another selling point – have you seen the Shell, BP and GE ads in magazines of late?
The complainers like Maybelle may fall to the wayside; the real sociopath gunslingers will find a way to adapt, in my view.
freebear
6 years ago
I saw a recent ad in the North Island Gazette that begins with:
"naturally, B.C. SALMON" and goes on to have a quote from a young, apparent fish farmer, and info from the salmonfarmers.org
Sounds like a spinning of mother nature to me!
BobbyPeru
6 years ago
Now that the left's economic and sociopolitical engineering policies have been thoroughly discredited, global warming is their next sword to attack the right. There's enough doubt by credible scientists on the origins of global warming to make policy makers pause before turning our economy and lives upside down to pursue questionable remedies for questionable threats.
Global warming is the left's sword to eviscerate our cherished beliefs and lifestyles and spill our collective guilt about what awful lives we lead. The left doesn't even have a solution to global warming. It either involves flagellating corporations, the usual culprits- big oil, big coal, big natural gas...we've heard this litany of whining before. To the left, more technology and industrial advancement is the enemy not the answer. The fact is that they'd like to take us back to the Stone Ages in their pursuit of the perfect love in at the commune. And that would result in higher mortality rates and a poorer standard of living. The fact is poorer countries pollute more than rich ones. And, ironically, the US has done a better job at clean air than Canada.
Then the other solution is big govt. Kyoto is the left's holy grail or just a vainglorious attempt to do something, anything for symbolic reasons. The fact is Kyoto would have been a monumental waste of money for Canada because key countries refused to join. And any pollution credit trading system run by the govt smells of waste and corruption. And even left wing scientists admit that if Kyoto worked its affect on the temperatures would be negligible. That our tax dollars are spent on ridiculous commercials asking us to reduce CO2 emissions shows how this "sky is falling" mentality has infected the govt.
Saner minds will prevail when we look back at history. Didn't the left invoke Malthus' theory in the 60s saying that overpopulation would outstrip our means of production. Or by the 70s pollution would kill us all. Didn't happen and we know why. Big business cleaned up, increased crop yields; technology improved environmental control systems; new cars were cleaner, more powerful and more efficient.
So that's the reality of environmental destiny, not the apocalypse of global warming.
BobbyPeru
6 years ago
And please stop parading the limosine liberals of the Canadian left, especially that hypocrite, David Suzuki. Funny that he's such a big business hater. Didn't his daughter attend Yale University in the US, funded by some of the biggest corporations in the world? And how did he afford it? With richly paid TV appearances over the years.
Hey, I want my kids to go to Yale and he shouldn't attack my big company job. If he has environmental concerns then he should constructively state them. But, don't deny me my ability to make my money like he has.
Michelle Y
6 years ago
Environmentalists are often discredited as being alarmist. Well, you should be alarmed. All is not well with the environment, and we cannot keep spouting economic growth as a necessity. Infinite growth is a fallacy and the planet cannot support unlimited consumption. Sustainability is not just a platitude, it is an exigency. Wake up and smell the pollution! Read more at Keeping Down with the Jones'http://keepingdownwiththejones.blogspot.com/2006/06/environmental-alarmism-wake-up-and.html
Michelle Y
6 years ago
Ooops....
http://keepingdownwiththejones.blogsp ot.com/2006/06/environmental-alarmism-wake-up-and.html
G West
6 years ago
the
of the neocons are in tatters too , Boddy Peru – far worse tatters than countries which are democratic and socialist. But of course you don’t want to talk about that.
That exporting democracy at the point of a gun project, how's that coming?
The pay down the US National debt deal, that one too?
The negative savings rate in the US - you neocons proud of that one too?
And Bush and Harper and their lying pack of blind acolytes don't even realize that their dogma has crippled them
Now they're well on the way to reducing the atmosphere to sludge.
And YOU'RE criticizing Davie Suzuki. At convocation at UVIC in the spring of 2005 I sat beside DR Suzuki while members of his family were graduating from UVic.
So what if some of his children/grandchildren went to Yale.
Nothing but hatred and whining.
Oh, I forgot - and ENVY!
peefer
6 years ago
You can tell how successful the PR campaign has been by all these posts attacking global warming as untrue, or untested, or controversial. Global warming is none of these.
You don't have to be a scientist to understand that a system that depends on constant growth, upon a planet of finite space and resources, is doomed to ultimate failure.
Left/right, capitalism/socialism are nonsense arguments designed to distract us from reality. Those engaged in any spin designed to distract us from reality are committing a crime against humanity and WILL be held to account, if anything resembling civilization survives.
We had better wake up and soon, 'cause, no matter how much money you have, there is gonna be no place to hide.
Not on this planet, anyways.