Marketing / PR / Corporate Communications
Could you convince people that dirty is clean?
Corporate marketers with "coal, oil, gas, utility, and car" companies
​
waged a gigantic ​ campaign to: "sabotage science" and "confuse the public & decision makers".
​​
​​​​​
​
​​
Oil companies "sought ... to burnish their reputations" as "environmental champions.” ! ​​​​​
​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
​​
​​​​​​
​ The "greenwashing ... by airlines was notably subtle."
​​​​​
​​
​​
“U.S. meat & dairy companies … spent millions” “downplaying" agricultural pollution.
​​
​​​​
​
​​​​​
Many companies use messaging to ​ "imply ... their products are [good] for the Earth."
Public Relations Historical Events:
​
​
Ivy Lee, Edward Bernays, and John Hill were public relations pioneers.
​
Their connections with oil and mining companies
go back at least as far as the Ludlow Massacre in 1914.
​​
​
​​
​
When "smog" became a problem in Los Angeles (1946) ​
fossil-fuel companies sponsored “research to ... shape public opinion.”
​​
​​
​
​
E. B. Harrison "made his mark in 1962".
​
“The godfather of ‘greenwashing',"
​
recommended trying to "appear environmentally responsible" without lessening pollution output.
​
​
1971: A PR campaign introduced a new idea: “littering”. Money came from can and beverage companies plus Big Tobacco, who "developed programs with Keep America Beautiful."
​
They designed "solutions acceptable to the tobacco industry", such as "volunteer clean-ups and ashtrays."
​​
Keep America Beautiful tried to "divert responsibility" from those who "sell disposable products.”
​
​
Some the world's biggest corporate polluters currently sponsor Keep America Beautiful:
Pepsi, Nestle, DuPont, Marlboro, McDonalds, Heineken, Dow, Busch, Altria (cigarettes), Coca-Cola, etc.
​​
​
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
​​
​
Starting in the 1990’s, the plastics "industry sold the public on an idea it knew wouldn't work -
​​
that plastic could be recycled." The industry has made billions selling new ("virgin") plastic.
“The ads were paid for by ... companies like Exxon, Chevron, Dow, & DuPont."
​​
​
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
​​
​
In the 2000's, the advertising firm, Ogilvy and Mather, revitalized the litter-is-your-fault idea for BP.
The oil-giant BP "promoted and ... popularized the term ‘carbon footprint’.”
​
This was done “to cover up BP’s dirty tricks that flow from their oil business.”
​
After the 2010 BP oil spill, "the corporate [footprint] advertising campaign stopped."
​​
​
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
​​
​
“Between 2005 and 2008, the Kochs alone spent nearly $25 million" by using think-tanks:
​
Supposedly "quasi-scholarly organizations", think-tanks actual purpose was to "legitimize the right to pollute.”
​​
​
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
​​
​
In 2008 Big Oil tried to blame pollution on auto-makers and car-drivers: “Improve your gas mileage”.
​
And: it's "important we reduce ... emissions." ​"Improving the efficiency of vehicles ... is one way to do so.”
​
2019: a top consultant admitted regrets. “‘I was wrong’ Frank Luntz told a ... Senate ... panel.”
​​
​
Luntz helps Republicans. "He crafted talking points for the Koch brothers.”
​​
​
He 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 paid groups that seem to be environmentally friendly - the National Park Foundation (NPF),
​
REI, the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) - to join marketing promotions.
​
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who are the NPF & NPCA?​ They're NOT the National Park Service, despite similar names.
​​​
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
​
A Subaru Senior Vice President of Marketing wrote that they hope to “Keep America ... Beautiful.”
​
Click on the green links to see:
which organizations hire PR firms,
​
and which professionals get hired.
Corporate consultants try various tactics, i.e., "spread [dis-information] about electric vehicles."
​
​
They hired scientists to rebut legitimate, unbiased science.
​
​
"What they did was immoral," doubting 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.”
​ Professional P.R. firms: "strive to influence [desires] and purchasing patterns."
​​
​
How do they do it?
​
​
They don't try to "sell nicotine patches ... as a means to quit smoking".
Instead, they imply that patches lead to happier "relationships, improved health, & longer life."
​
Can you “spot the tricks Big Oil uses”?!? ​
​
​
Examine this carefully worded item from a colossal international oil company, claiming it:
"has always put people at the center of the energy conversation.
Because we understand that the well-being of people everywhere depends on energy.”
Why choose those words?
This corporation supports "people". Would it ever harm anyone - while pursuing profits?
It describes itself as "we". Is it human, or a heartless bureaucratic corporate conglomerate?
​
Who doesn't want "energy"? Who doesn't like "conversation"?
When you hear one of these slick hucksters say "energy", assume you are being manipulated.
​
This company "understands". How many deaths are caused by this "understanding" organization?
​
And it's concerned about "well-being"?
As opposed to illnesses their real world product create for "people everywhere"?
​
​
Do you want to visit the fake world they portray? Perhaps an Exxon-sponsored, Disney-World ride with video of/by Ellen DeGeneres, Jamie Lee-Curtis, and Bill Nye? “Yes, it existed.”
​
-
-
Phony "grass-roots movements” are called "astro-turf".
-
-
​
-
Marketers "hire social media influencers to make cooking
-
with gas stoves seem ... trendy, despite the indoor air pollution.”
-
​
-
-
“The Petroleum Product Marketing course consists of 8 lessons.”
-
Consumer "perception" of a company can expand enthusiasm for a boycott.
Marketing ​is intended to influence perception.
​
​
​
Could marketing techniques be used to decrease polluting behaviors?
​​
"Accentuate the benefits" of "flying less, driving less, wasting less, having fewer children."
​​​
​