Screenshot from Vote 4 Energy video via YouTube
Sep 14, 2012
An analysis from the New York Times published Friday shows that fossil fuel industry has been pumping millions into television ads to defeat President Obama.
Eric Lipton and Clifford Krauss write in their report that $153 million has been spent this year on television ads that promote fossil fuels or criticize renewables, nearly four times the $41 million spent promoting renewables or praising President Obama's energy plans.
"This year's campaign on behalf of fossil fuels includes a surge in political contributions to Mitt Romney, attack ads questioning Mr. Obama's clean-energy agenda, and television spots that are not overtly partisan but criticize administration actions like new air pollution rules and the delay of the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada," report Lipton and Krauss.
The American Petroleum Institute has been the top energy spender, the Times reports, having spent $37 million so far on television ads.
The spending is in sharp contrast to that of 2008, when "green ads greatly outnumbered those for fossil fuels, $152 million to $109 million."
Read the full article here.
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
An analysis from the New York Times published Friday shows that fossil fuel industry has been pumping millions into television ads to defeat President Obama.
Eric Lipton and Clifford Krauss write in their report that $153 million has been spent this year on television ads that promote fossil fuels or criticize renewables, nearly four times the $41 million spent promoting renewables or praising President Obama's energy plans.
"This year's campaign on behalf of fossil fuels includes a surge in political contributions to Mitt Romney, attack ads questioning Mr. Obama's clean-energy agenda, and television spots that are not overtly partisan but criticize administration actions like new air pollution rules and the delay of the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada," report Lipton and Krauss.
The American Petroleum Institute has been the top energy spender, the Times reports, having spent $37 million so far on television ads.
The spending is in sharp contrast to that of 2008, when "green ads greatly outnumbered those for fossil fuels, $152 million to $109 million."
Read the full article here.
An analysis from the New York Times published Friday shows that fossil fuel industry has been pumping millions into television ads to defeat President Obama.
Eric Lipton and Clifford Krauss write in their report that $153 million has been spent this year on television ads that promote fossil fuels or criticize renewables, nearly four times the $41 million spent promoting renewables or praising President Obama's energy plans.
"This year's campaign on behalf of fossil fuels includes a surge in political contributions to Mitt Romney, attack ads questioning Mr. Obama's clean-energy agenda, and television spots that are not overtly partisan but criticize administration actions like new air pollution rules and the delay of the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada," report Lipton and Krauss.
The American Petroleum Institute has been the top energy spender, the Times reports, having spent $37 million so far on television ads.
The spending is in sharp contrast to that of 2008, when "green ads greatly outnumbered those for fossil fuels, $152 million to $109 million."
Read the full article here.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.