Jan 3, 2007 4:57pm

ExxonMobil ‘Disinformation’ on Climate? The Company Responds

Did ExxonMobil follow the lead of tobacco companies, funding front groups to "cloud the scientific understanding of climate change"?  That was the charge from the Union of Concerned Scientists (see below).  A little while ago, ExxonMobil emailed us a statement in reponse to the report: "This clearly is yet another attempt to smear our name and confuse the discussion of the serious issue of CO2 emissions and global climate change. The report is nothing but a ‘faction’…an attempt to connect unrelated facts, draw inaccurate conclusions and mislead the audience with a fiction about ExxonMobil’s true positions…."  …and we were still reading through it when a second email arrived: "Please replace the statement previously sent you with the one below:" This second version removes the opening language about the "smear," and replaces it with this: "From our initial review of the 63-page report by the Union of Concerned Scientists, many of its conclusions are inaccurate.  Let me clarify ExxonMobil’s position on climate change." You can read the full text HERE. In brief, it says, "We recognize that the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere poses risks that may prove significant for society and ecosystems…."  It quotes from an ExxonMobil statement titled "Tomorrow’s Energy." The company says it has supported research and policy analysis from many different universities and public policy organizations.  "As you might expect,"it says, "in many cases and with respect to the full range of policy positions taken by these organizations, we find some of them persuasive and enlightening, and some not.  But there is value in the debate they prompt if it can lead to better informed and more optimal public policy decisions." So.  Two sides, both apparently seething, in a debate on a major issue. 

User Comments

I find it quite interesting that, in the first e-mail you received, ExxonMobil “came out swinging” to portray the Union of Concerned Scientists as a group of eccentrics more concerned with destroying the reputation of ExxonMobil than with presenting the facts of climate change. In the second e-mail, the company’s tone seemingly changed from belligerent and confrontational to reasoned and rational. Please forgive me, but I seem to recall the same tactics used by the tobacco companies in their fight against the 1964 Surgeon General’s report: a hardline stance at first, then gradual softening to a more rational-sounding approach. Déjà vu all over again.

Posted by: chuck | January 4, 2007, 8:38 am 8:38 am

And while they debate, the problem worsens.
Chuck is right, too. Having said that, though, you have to remember that they have a business to protect. If oil consumption were to drop significantly, they’d be hard-pressed to show the stockholders something.
Ultimately, the problem will worsen until it chokes us. Nothing will solve it, because the government hasn’t the political will to do anything, and the people aren’t ready to make any sacrifices.
Where’s altruism when you really need it?

Posted by: Andy | January 4, 2007, 1:27 pm 1:27 pm

Disinformation–Is the pot calling the kettle black? In Ned Potter’s a Jan 5 segment on ABC World News, he spliced together an collage of quotes to support the “faction” that the warm weather being experince in much of the US is largely due to global warming. One of his video snippets came from a NOAA scientist who tried to say the El Ninio was the primary cause, but Ned’s segment brushed that explanation aside in his misguided desire to create hysteria over global warming. Interstingly just be fore Ned’s segment, I watch a similar story on NBC Nightly News. This included a longer interview with a NOAA scientist who dismissed the idea that global warming was responsible for recent warm temperatures in the US. He also pointed to El Ninio as the cause and gave an explanations why.
I am NOT posting this to argue against the reality of global warming. I’m pointing out that poor science reporting, like the ABC segment, can only add to the confusion. Political posturing and emotional manipulation have already crippled our ability to address key issues in this nation. Please don’t do the same thing to the global warming issue.

Posted by: Deland | January 6, 2007, 1:25 pm 1:25 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.