Slick Rewrite: L.A. Times Blames Climate Change for 28-Year-Old Oil Spill
By Aly Nielsen | April 6, 2017 | 5:26 PM EDT
The Los Angeles Times has struck once again in a feeble attempt to sink ExxonMobil. This time, rewriting the story of a 28-year-old shipwreck.
The April 6 L.A. Times story, by Columbia Journalism School researchers, used 2,340 words to reject years of court cases and research. Instead, the agenda-driven story blamed the 1989 Exxon Valdez shipwreck and resulting oil spill on climate change.
The anti-Exxon hit piece is part of the Energy and Environmental Reporting Project at Columbia Journalism School, which also produced the 2015 #ExxonKnew campaign. Both reports were published by the L.A. Times and funded by George Soros, The Rockefeller Brothers Fund and The Rockefeller Family Fund. Steve Coll, Dean of the Columbia Journalism School, has been attacking Exxon for years and is tied to at least $1.6 million from Rockefeller foundations. He wrote a book smearing Exxon in 2013 while president of the New America Foundation.…
Oh No! Study warns of CO2 at 5,000 parts per million by the year 2400! ‘To cause unprecedented warming’
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2017/04/05/study-offers-dire-warning-climate-change/cyozAC0fjeamFAWhiEXAFL/story.html
Fake News: #ExxonKnew Campaign In LA Times Claims ‘Global Warming’ Caused 1989 Exxon Valdez Spill – Point By Point debunking
How irrelevant and desperate has the #ExxonKnew campaign become? Well, they’re now claiming that global warming caused the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill, and that Exxon should have known it would happen. The claims were made in yet another article written by graduate students at the Columbia Journalism School, which was published today in the Los Angeles Times.
The article – fit more for The Onion than the LA Times – claims that ExxonMobil had evidence that the Columbia Glacier was calving due to climate change, but allowed one of its tankers to put itself in the way of the icebergs anyway.
Anyone who has ever followed the story knows that the only ice responsible for the Exxon Valdez spill would be the ice cooling the captain’s many cocktails that night. But for anti-Exxon campaigners, no alternate theories (or should we say alternative facts?) are too outrageous to publish.
For background, this is the LA Times’ latest installment of a series authored by graduate students at the Columbia School of Journalism, who were bankrolled by wealthy anti-fossil fuel foundations such as the Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF) and Rockefeller Family Fund (RFF). The school’s dean, Steve Coll, also wrote an anti-Exxon book, Private Empire, while serving as President of the New America Foundation, which – surprise! – is also funded by the Rockefellers.
And yes, this is the same group that was criticized last week by a federal judge who said the Columbia School of Journalism and InsideClimate News (which is also funded by the Rockefellers and wrote its own anti-Exxon series) were “trying to pursue the same climate change policy agendas” as the attorneys general who have launched investigations into ExxonMobil.
Now why would the LA Times, which presumably wants to be seen as an objective news outlet, print such obviously paid-for (and ridiculous) “journalism”?
Perhaps it has to do with money. Recall that the LA Times failed to disclose that the original #ExxonKnew series it published in late 2015 was funded by the Rockefellers. It only did so months after other news outlets discovered the lack of disclosure. Even the Columbia Journalism Review said not disclosing this funding was a mistake, noting “the rollout after publication was botched. While this particular misstep occurred on the most contentious of stories, the question of when and how to disclose funding for such
Climate change hangs over Trump’s meeting with China’s Xi Jinping
President Trump is expected to discuss the Paris climate change deal when he meets with Chinese President Xi Jinping this week. But don’t expect much in the way of agreement.
Xi will meet with Trump beginning Thursday at the president’s Mar-a-Lago retreat in Florida, fresh from a visit to Finland where climate change and collaboration on Arctic policy were top points of discussion.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry, in response to Trump’s recent executive order rolling back former President Barack Obama’s climate regulations, said China will push forward with its plan to cut fossil fuel emissions in line with the Paris Agreement goal.
China, the world’s biggest producer of greenhouse gases, pledged to put a peak on its emissions by 2030 in a deal with the U.S. that also is part of its Paris goal. China produces about one-fourth of the world’s carbon emissions, topping the second-place United States, which produces about 15 percent.…
27 Years later, LA TIMES NOW Blames Exxon Valdez Spill on — Global Warming! & Exxon Knew It!? (Soros funded article)
The role a melting iceberg played in Exxon’s biggest disaster
By DINO GRANDONI, ASAF SHALEV, MICHAEL PHILLIS, SUSANNE RUST – APRIL 6, 2017
The article – fit more for The Onion than the LA Times – claims that ExxonMobil had evidence that the Columbia Glacier was calving due to climate change, but allowed one of its tankers to put itself in the way of the icebergs anyway. Anyone who has ever followed the story knows that the only ice responsible for the Exxon Valdez spill would be the ice cooling the captain’s many cocktails that night. But for anti-Exxon campaigners, no alternate theories (or should we say alternative facts?) are too outrageous to publish…
The Columbia School of Journalism students claim Exxon should have known climate change would cause glaciers to calve, but they deliberately omit how the documents say calving has other causes.
Exxon Valdez is the most studied industrial incident to date. Yet not a single credible study has ever stated that climate change was the culprit.
The Iceberg Monitoring Project report notes that calving rates from the Columbia Glacier cannot be predicted and that climate change isn’t even among the most significant contributors to glacial calving. Here are some key passages from the source document to which the Columbia team refused to link: “Changes in the climate probably have only a minor effect on iceberg production once a drastic retreat is underway as calving rates are more controlled by water depth and ice flow rates than by meteorological factors.”
US coal companies reportedly ask White House to remain in UN Paris climate pact
Two of the top U.S. coal companies reportedly asked the White House to back down on President Trump’s vow to pull out of the landmark Paris climate pact, arguing that the deal could protect its global interests.
Cloud Peak Energy and Peabody Energy executives told White House officials over the last few weeks that staying in the climate deal may give U.S. negotiators a change to advocate for coal in the future, Reuters reported Tuesday.
“The future is foreign markets, so the last thing you want to do if you are a coal company is to give up a U.S. seat in the international climate discussions and let the Europeans control the agenda,” a U.S. official familiar with the talks told Reuters. “They can’t afford for the most powerful advocate for fossil fuels to be away from the table.”
Richard Reavey, Cloud Peak’s vice president of government affairs, said staying in the accord and trying to create a “reasonable path forward” on fossil fuel technologies is a reasonable stance.
Officials said the coal industry wants to ensure the Paris deal provides a financial role for storage technology as well as role for low-emission coal-powered plants. The industry also hopes the agreement would protect multilateral funding for global coal projects through international bodies like the World Bank, Reuters reported.…
Big oil climate appeasement: ExxonMobil executives urge Trump to keep U.S. in UN Climate Agreement
ExxonMobil executives recently urged President Trump to break a campaign promise and keep the U.S. in the UN’s disastrous Paris climate agreement.
Secretary of State and former Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson agrees with his old colleagues and has said he favors taking the Trump Administration in the same direction.
This would be a huge mistake.
President Trump signed an executive order designed to roll back the Obama Administration’s global warming policies and end its war on energy. The President’s E.O. makes no mention of the Paris agreement.
But if he’s going to push America toward energy independence, dumping this ill-founded UN agreement is an absolute must.
In recent years, energy companies – Exxon in particular – have been constant targets of Green campaigners. This often makes them weak-kneed and fearful. They’d like nothing better than to rid themselves of these pesky Green gadflies and improve their image among the elitist media.
To accomplish this, businesses all too often seek to buy off the Greens rather than stand up to them. Exxon’s position on the UN treaty appears to follow in this ignoble tradition. Fueling the Greens with corporate credibility and cash is, to paraphrase Winston Churchill, like “feeding a crocodile hoping it’ll eat you last.”
President Trump should see through Exxon’s attempt to “greenwash” away its public relations problems, keep his campaign promise, and free America from the UN climate agreement.