Years later, we saw that the oil companies, which are primarily responsible for the climate crisis, have known about the problem since the 1970s! They did not sweep the scientific reports under the rug, they did not sweep them into the vacuum of space! Moreover, the US government, which is the playmaker of the chief polluters, knew about these reports! Just like the main players in the tobacco industry, they have made a special effort to hide the truth from the public with their “denial” policies for decades. They have poured millions of dollars into lobbying and PR companies to prevent the public from meeting the truth. In fact, the politics of “denial” still persist. If the Trump administration had remained in office in the US, the Paris Climate Agreement would have continued to be “ignored” by them, and the information and findings of the 1970s are just as “appalling” as they are today. It reveals what kind of desperation awaits the planet in the face of climate due to fossil fuels and their derivatives.
The United Nations shared with the world public opinion with the Bruntland report in 1987 that the planet is a climate problem. We learn from Inside Climate News that Exxon, which led the oil sector 11 years ago, has information about where the climate crisis is coming from!
For some reason, we cannot face the fact that at the core of our plastic, carbon, glass, water footprint issue is actually our “moral footprint”. For example, the concept of “Polluted PR” has entered the literature because of the PR companies that oil producers “use” to evade the facts from society ! Spending time to “save the day” knowing that the future of humanity is threatened is not something that can be explained morally.
Moreover…
What’s more; these main polluters are trying to look cute to the public with various under-table communication games to make themselves look “green” nowadays! You don’t know how they were involved in an effective climate change struggle! They were lying with environmental sensitivity, especially their CEOs, and they were putting forth their non-existence for the sustainability umbrella!
In order to explain all this, they pour money into the system, especially advertising and PR. It is a question mark how credible and effective and even “creative” work affects society. But when we question their work morally, we see that they are still in the room of “suspects”. Of course, this “change of rank”, which means nothing more than changing jackets, shows that their work is still morally problematic!
They still read what they know. What about the communicators who serve them in this sense? Shouldn’t they also be morally questioned? Or do they really believe in those who do business on the fossil spine?
Who was the majority among the 500 people who were not invited to COP 26 and the representatives of the fossil industry who “attended in some way” the conferences; Lobbyists, PR people and, of course, advertisers… Because, according to the Fossil Free Media report, they generate more than $200 million in revenue from this industry every year. They have only one job; to destroy the “moral footprints” of this sector!
With the Clean Creatives campaign, the PR and advertising industry was asked to leave these customers. And as a matter of fact, Porter Novelli, one of the biggest in the world, broke with the American Gas Association. The big oil companies undoubtedly have clean energy units within their bodies. But they are so small, their influence is insignificant, and so insignificant compared to the era of the organization to which they belong, that it is not even worth mentioning. Some of them are even supported by influential non-governmental organizations.
According to Fossil Free Media, PR companies often hide the fact that these companies are among their customers. “Here’s another moral footprint problem!” If you look at which clients these companies, which represent more than 80% of PR consulting revenues in the world, work with, you will see why the issue of moral footprint is more important than carbon, plastic, water and glass;
Hill+Knowlton Strategies (Shell, Exxon Mobil, Chevron); Fleishman Hillard (API, Natural Gas Industry, National Association of Manufacturers); Porter Novelli (American Public Gas Association); Ketchum (Exxon Mobil); Weber Shandwick (Exxon Mobil); Edelman (Shell, Chevron, and numerous industry bodies); FTI Consulting (Exxon Mobil and the Independent Petroleum Association of America) and Brunswick (BP). Full list is here!
The communication sector has even produced scientific know-how on the issue of “denial”. If you look at it, you will see very clearly how the system and processes work. For this, we have to go back to 1964. After reviewing more than 7,000 articles, Luther Terry, the head of the US National Health Agency, prepared a report on the fact that smoking is harmful to health and even causes lung cancer, and shared it with the public.
This report may not have pleased the players of the cigarette industry, but it has led to the emergence of a wheel of denial in which the fossil industry is also grateful for its processes. The public has been confused by disinformation strategies. Tactics such as so-called scientific reports prepared by academics for money, non-governmental organizations they established to defend their own causes, and having leading figures of society speak at conferences, panels and seminars for their money turned into a world of denial industry. Who were the main players other than those who gave their money? Of course… You know! The journey that started with the aim of covering up the shame of the tobacco industry continues today with similar policies of the oil industry on the climate issue. Communicators are behind the wheel, not in the side seat!
At this point, PR and advertising professional organizations have important duties. It doesn’t matter if it’s domestic or international.
They may be sorting glass, plastic, paper in their agency. They may even be tracking down to where they are dumped. They may also be measuring their carbon footprint on a regular basis. They also ask each other to account for the unnecessary water consumed. They may have brought informing their family members and social circles about the climate issue to their agenda as well as their main job. But what will they do if there are “chief polluters” among the agency’s clients, or if one of them knocks on the door with a bulging wallet? How will they stand up when individual “upright” stances on the one hand and “corporate interests” clash on the other?
Therefore, agencies should manage the issue of moral footprint with policies that will be appreciated by the society. They should say that there is something more important than money. They must measure the “moral footprints” of their industries themselves. They should publish. They should turn into organizations with enforcement powers. In this sense, they should be an example to other sectors. They should be able to boldly say like Edward Snowden that they “have nothing to lose.”
(*) Written for the January/February 2022 issue of BrandMap Magazine.
Leave a Reply