Shameful work on behalf of Ogilvy. And they wonder why people hate the advertising industry.
Extremely useful article, thank you for sharing!
The statistics itself is probably of good quality, but I dare argue that the media are disrespectful to the original report.
57 oil, gas, coal and cement producers
Err... yeah, I mean, yeah? Sure? Are there 1000,000 producers? Just count the big miners and soon you'll reach 80% of emission. Of course.
Indeed, this "just 57" seems to be a view that The Guardian added. The project webpage does no sensationalization of this number. This means, The Guardian did read the report, but chose not to focus on the main contribution. I hate this attitude, being a researcher myself. Well, they saw a professional study and sold it as an amateur argument! I'm sure the authors were disappointed.
The Carbon Majors research has helped to change the narrative about responsibility for the climate crisis by apportioning emissions to the entities that profit from taking fossil fuels out of the ground rather than the individuals that later burn and discharge them in the form of emissions.
I'm fine with the narrative, but if I wanted to lead it, I'd not hack this honest statistics, unlike media are doing this time. I'd instead study how these 57 producers trap and lobby the consumers.
Kudos on the researchers revealing what Exxon is actually doing behind their PR campaign that claims otherwise.
Fair points. Unfortunately, that's on a subed for not fact-checking ahead of the story going live.
It's truly insane how many of these were eased up on through 2016 to 2020 :(
Before the fossil fuel shills can show up and say,
“we all need to reduce our carbon footprint so these companies will stop creating greenhouse gasses!”
Let me point out, that is a fossil fuel strategy:
In 2005, fossil fuel company BP hired the large advertising campaign Ogilvy to popularize the idea of a carbon footprint for individuals.
Shameful work on behalf of Ogilvy. And they wonder why people hate the advertising industry.
Extremely useful article, thank you for sharing!
The statistics itself is probably of good quality, but I dare argue that the media are disrespectful to the original report.
Err... yeah, I mean, yeah? Sure? Are there 1000,000 producers? Just count the big miners and soon you'll reach 80% of emission. Of course.
Indeed, this "just 57" seems to be a view that The Guardian added. The project webpage does no sensationalization of this number. This means, The Guardian did read the report, but chose not to focus on the main contribution. I hate this attitude, being a researcher myself. Well, they saw a professional study and sold it as an amateur argument! I'm sure the authors were disappointed.
I'm fine with the narrative, but if I wanted to lead it, I'd not hack this honest statistics, unlike media are doing this time. I'd instead study how these 57 producers trap and lobby the consumers.
Kudos on the researchers revealing what Exxon is actually doing behind their PR campaign that claims otherwise.
Fair points. Unfortunately, that's on a subed for not fact-checking ahead of the story going live.
It's truly insane how many of these were eased up on through 2016 to 2020 :(