If you've no account register here first time
User Name :
User Email :
Password :

Login Now

Top PR Firms Won’t Represent Climate Change Deniers

WPP, Waggener Edstrom (WE) Worldwide, Weber Shandwick, Text100 and Finn Partners are among the leading public relations firms that have pledged to not represent clients that deny man-made climate change or seek to block emissions-reducing regulations.

The Guardian reports that 10 of the top 25 global PR firms — responding to a survey conducted by the newspaper and Washington, DC-based Climate Investigations Center — said they won’t work with climate-change deniers.

This could hurt industry groups lobbying against the EPA’s proposed rules limiting carbon pollution from power plants and the international negotiations for a climate change treaty.

(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today)
5 Reasons To Make the Switch from Scantron
Sponsored By: Progressly

Real-Time Data as a Foundation to Drive Sustainability Performance
Sponsored By: Sphera Solutions

EHS Special Report
Sponsored By: Environmental Leader

How to Unsilo Your EHS Data
Sponsored By: Progressly


2 thoughts on “Top PR Firms Won’t Represent Climate Change Deniers

  1. This is the sort of move that relegates environmentalists and their concerns to being inconsequential. Want to know why C-Suite sustainability officers are the personification of the “empty suit”, why all the end of the world rhetoric is falling on deaf ears and no one is buying it any more? It’s precisely because of stunts like this one. They should be explaining the “15 year hiatus” of GW or the tortured numbers around the “97% of all scientists” BS story or why Al Gore’s book and Ted (the Unabomber) Kaczynski’s NY Times Manifesto were indistinguishable from one another. Being turned away by this PR firm should be a badge of intelligence.

  2. It is amusing to note the wildly false claims cited above; that are not backed up by a single piece of evidence. They are bandied about quite casually, as though they are somehow widely accepted and already proven. In fact, the opposite is true: they are false and unsupported.
    For example, the fact that climate change is supported by 97%-98% of top climatologists from all over the world; is well documented right here: http://www.pnas.org/content/107/27/12107.full. There are no “tortured numbers” here – just clear science whose methodology is fully presented and well explained. The fact that deniers choose to not understand, or choose to react with falsehoods and/or with illogical ‘arguments’; does not detract from the conclusion in the slightest.
    Claiming the existence of a supposed “15 year hiatus” is likewise not supported by the facts. See here for a brief discussion of the true facts: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/apr/24/reuters-puzzled-global-warming-acceleration. Also see here: http://skepticalscience.com/nuccitelli-et-al-2012.html and here: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50382/abstract.
    And to claim that a Unabomber manifesto and a book by Al Gore are somehow “indistinguishable”; is a laughable lie – in addition to which such a claim is totally unrelated to any question surrounding global warming or even any question surrounding the original EL article. Somehow, I don’t think that a commenter making such a claim is in any way capable of distinguishing whether ‘badges of intelligence’ should be awarded – under any circumstances.

Leave a Comment