Just how desperate will oil companies get?

Viral Video;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZSqXUSwHRI
[A parody of An Inconvenient Truth depicting penguins bored by al gore]

Quote :

"The film actually came from a slick Republican public relations firm called DCI, which just happens to have oil giant Exxon as a client."

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2273111&page=1
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=gore%20exxon&btnG=Google+Search&sa=N&tab=wn

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 7:06 AM. Reason : bravo]

8/9/2006 7:05:49 AM

Old.

http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=424389&page=1#9123586

8/9/2006 7:14:07 AM

this deserves its own thread

its proof that oil companies are aiming to create cacophony, and not real science.

8/9/2006 7:18:01 AM

its old....im serial

8/9/2006 7:48:45 AM

cereal

its new

8/9/2006 7:51:17 AM

haha...cereal....my fault....

i dont know if its new or old...i was just trying to slide in the word "cereal"

8/9/2006 7:53:31 AM

Quote :

"Just how desperate will oil companies get?"

about as desperate as al gore

8/9/2006 9:24:54 AM

ahahahahaha the manbearpig poster was priceless.

8/9/2006 9:28:50 AM

Quote :

"a slick Republican public relations firm called DCI"

this is funny...

8/9/2006 9:48:16 AM

"Slick" is about the nicest term I can think of to describe GOP astroturfing.

8/9/2006 10:20:46 AM

My response the last time this came up:

Quote :

"I'll preface this by stating that yes, concealing the origin of the video is disingenuous. To tie this with some of the other threads going on right now, this article is an example of bias. Quote : "The film actually came from a slick Republican public relations firm called DCI, which just happens to have oil giant Exxon as a client." - The word 'slick' is not an objective word. It's subjective and the context in which it was used lends some very negative connotations. - DCI has many clients: AT&T, Avue Technologies, Coca-Cola, General Motors Corporation, Intel, McDonalds, Merck, Microsoft, NAQ, PhRMA, Qualcomm, and Exxon. Exxon is the only business mentioned, though. Through a nice little piece of demagoguery and perhaps a loaded question or two, the article implies--with no actual evidence whatsoever--that Exxon is the particular client behind the movie. - DCI is listed as a "Republican public relations firm" which it most definitely is. From looking at DCI's website, they are unabashedly so. However, while pointing out that DCI is Republican, the article fails to mention that the Center for Media and Democracy could easily be considered equally Democratic. Google shows the Center for Media and Democracy, its founder John Stauber, and Diane Farsetta are not neutral parties: they are environmenatlists and politically active. Which is fine, but they're certainly not the unbiased commentators they are treated as. And before you get your panties into too big of a wad, let me remind of Marty Meehan "

8/9/2006 10:32:55 AM

Are you unable to come to the simplest of conclusions?

Clearly Intel is heavily invested in seeing that global warming is discredited.

And the Center for Media and Democracy is obviously the one who's credibility is being questioned. How could that article leave it out?

8/9/2006 10:47:20 AM

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: DCI is listed as a "Republican public relations firm" which it most definitely is. From looking at DCI's website, they are unabashedly so. However, while pointing out that DCI is Republican, the article fails to mention that the Center for Media and Democracy could easily be considered equally Democratic. Google shows the Center for Media and Democracy, its founder John Stauber, and Diane Farsetta are not neutral parties: they are environmenatlists and politically active. Which is fine, but they're certainly not the unbiased commentators they are treated as."

So the political affiliations of corporate officers determines if a company is Republican or Democrat? That's amusing.

How have they managed to have any successful lobbying campaigns in all those states run by Democrats?... 

8/9/2006 10:54:59 AM

^^ As I mentioned before,

Quote :

"I agree with you. Exxon would definitely be my suspicion. However, suspicion is not fact and the article makes no mention of "ExxonMobil, which holds climate change views opposite to those espoused by Al Gore in An Inconvenient Truth, is a client of the DCI Group. Exxon denied having any knowledge of the video's origin when asked if it had commissioned the YouTube video." Instead, it's left there as an implied "Well, we're pretty sure that Exxon did it, but Exxon and DCI are colluding to cover it up.""

^ and ^^
With respect to political affiliations and questioning credibility:

1) If you question someone's credibility, you use a neutral third party. You don't choose a group that's biased against both DCI and Exxon to provide neutral criticism. Certainly not without mentioning the third party's stance.

2) I don't give a shit if/how you classify companys as 'Republican' or 'Democrat.' The author of the article, however, felt the need to classify DCI as Republican but didn't see fit to classify the Center for Media and Democracy as a political organization. That's what I have an issue with.

-----

And, no the political affiliation of corporate officers does not automatically determine whether a company is Republican or Democrat. If you look at DCI's website (the Leadership page), the company makes a point of listing the political affiliation and political activities of each person. DCI has made political affiliation a part of their corporate image--and that makes the company Republican.

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 11:17 AM. Reason : ]

8/9/2006 11:11:28 AM

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: DCI has made political affiliation a part of their corporate image--and that makes the company Republican."

No, DCI has made political activities a part of their leadership page bios, which happen to be predominantly in Republican campaigns and organizations.

That's a pretty hefty difference.

But regardless, I ask again: these people do lobbying, if they're such a "Republican" company how do they get anything accomplished in Democrat-run states? (like, say, North Carolina) 

8/9/2006 12:28:34 PM

Can't hate oil companies for trying to make a profit.

8/9/2006 12:43:16 PM

no its for the collusion and monopolistic behavior

8/9/2006 4:13:48 PM

so in 20 years are you gonna be like "those damn oil ethanol companies and their collusion and monopolistic behavior"

lets all make our own electricity while we're at it...its easy and cheap

8/9/2006 4:16:42 PM

^^^^ Uh....the word you're looking for isn't "predominately"--it's exclusively. Those bios didn't get there accidently. DCI, as you've repeatedly mentioned, is a lobbying and PR firm. Those biographies are pruposely there to convey a certain image and to convey the perception of connections with the Republican party. If they wished to remain politically neutral, they would talk generically about community involvement, not about specific campaigns they've worked.

You need to rephrase your lobbying question. I don't understand what point you're trying to make or even why you're asking the question. If it bothers you that much, why don't you ask DCI about their prior successes and failures--several of them have worked here in NC. But if I had to guess, I'd say you haven't read the website and you're talking out of your ass/trolling.

8/9/2006 5:28:08 PM

^^ ethanol has no future

8/9/2006 5:29:34 PM

Quote :

"these people do lobbying, if they're such a "Republican" company how do they get anything accomplished in Democrat-run states?"

Money is a bipartisan resolution.

8/9/2006 5:32:38 PM

^
except when it's limited to a max of $4,000, that "Democrat" causes readily match in Democrat-heavy states

---

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: If they wished to remain politically neutral, they would talk generically about community involvement, not about specific campaigns they've worked."

The bios are on the "leadership" page -- e.g. describing the people who founded and run the upper echelons of the company. You don't put "Our CEO Joe Smith is chairman of his son's school PTA. Please hire our firm to handle your multi-billion dollar lobbying campaign!." You put what they've actually done, demonstrate they have the competence and experience not to run the company into the ground.

---

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: I don't understand what point you're trying to make or even why you're asking the question. If it bothers you that much, why don't you ask DCI about their prior successes and failures--several of them have worked here in NC."

If English is that difficult for you, you probably should've stopped posting in this thread after you started...  

8/9/2006 8:24:07 PM

democrats are soooooooooooo gonna win in 08

8/9/2006 8:29:47 PM

^"They" are saying that Democrats are gonna rock the midterms, but I dunno, man...part of me thinks that's just wishful thinking or delusion or part of a general campaign--like, if we keep saying that it's gonna happen, maybe it will happen, you know.

I guess I was so humbled and confused in 2004 that I don't feel sure/good about anything now.

8/9/2006 8:41:31 PM

And yet you won't rephrase your largely rhetorical question. Plus, you claim ignorance of marketing and public image.

This is starting to look like "Oh, your simplicity amuses me! What sort of silly person calls companies Republican? Hahahaha!" (in your best condescending tone), followed by "Well, because they call themselves Republican," followed by "Yeah, well er...............then tell me how they can do anything if they're Republican? Huh? Tell me that!"

8/9/2006 8:48:01 PM