The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change
1–10 of 70 posts
Re: The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change
#2it is high time we called 'PR' what it is - corporate propaganda - in order to strip the discipline of the legitimacy it somehow retains. It's basically paid for BS, and when it comes to climate change, everyone is going to be paying the price
Re: The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change
#3it is high time we called 'PR' what it is - corporate propaganda - in order to strip the discipline of the legitimacy it somehow retains. It's basically paid for BS, and when it comes to climate change, everyone is going to be paying the price
So you believe whatever story appears on BBC?
Re: The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change
#4it is high time we called 'PR' what it is - corporate propaganda - in order to strip the discipline of the legitimacy it somehow retains. It's basically paid for BS, and when it comes to climate change, everyone is going to be paying the price
[deleted]
Re: The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change
#5> "My role was to identify the voices that were not in the mainstream and to give those voices a stage," Rheem says. [...]
> He says the media was hungry for these perspectives.
> "Journalists were actually actively looking for the contrarians. It was really feeding an appetite that was already there."
A rare example of the BBC breaking the media omertà on itself here. You thought journalism was supposed to help you understand the world? Nope, reading our slop will actually make you *less* able to make informed decisions.
There was a good paper written about this all the way back in 2007 [1]. Makes for some eyebrow-raising reading in the year-of-our-lord 2022.
[1] https://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/publications/downloads/boykoff07-ge...
Re: The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change
#6it is high time we called 'PR' what it is - corporate propaganda - in order to strip the discipline of the legitimacy it somehow retains. It's basically paid for BS, and when it comes to climate change, everyone is going to be paying the price
Do you at least appreciate the irony of the BBC here saying we shouldn't give contrary opinions a stage as a way of ensuring integrity?
Re: The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change
#7it is high time we called 'PR' what it is - corporate propaganda - in order to strip the discipline of the legitimacy it somehow retains. It's basically paid for BS, and when it comes to climate change, everyone is going to be paying the price
So you believe whatever story appears on BBC?
"So you believe BBC exists ? Do your own research !".
Yes, though, I'm inclined to believe a sourced article from a major publicly founded outlet including quotes from the "accused" admiting to what they have done, over most corporate PR.
But maybe I should not, what do we care anyway ?
Re: The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change
#8it is high time we called 'PR' what it is - corporate propaganda - in order to strip the discipline of the legitimacy it somehow retains. It's basically paid for BS, and when it comes to climate change, everyone is going to be paying the price
Proper terminology needs to be crafted for corporate tactics and their incessant attempts towards undermining public good.
Re: The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change
#9it is high time we called 'PR' what it is - corporate propaganda - in order to strip the discipline of the legitimacy it somehow retains. It's basically paid for BS, and when it comes to climate change, everyone is going to be paying the price
Do you at least appreciate the irony of the BBC here saying we shouldn't give contrary opinions a stage as a way of ensuring integrity?
yes indeed I do, BBC itself started for PR purposes, I believe BBC Worldwide retains it as its core purpose
Re: The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change
#10it is high time we called 'PR' what it is - corporate propaganda - in order to strip the discipline of the legitimacy it somehow retains. It's basically paid for BS, and when it comes to climate change, everyone is going to be paying the price
So you believe whatever story appears on BBC?
No - the claim that PR agencies were involved in climate change denial is pretty solid. It's basically their work. My point is that we should resist the renaming BS