SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Allowing Corporate Sponsorship of Great Barrier Reef Likened to Naming Hospital After Tobacco Company
Opponents slam Australian government's controversial new initiative for reef conservation
Dec 16, 2015
Australia is seeking corporate sponsors to fund a new Great Barrier Reef conservation initiative, sparking fears that big companies could invest in the endangered marine site to 'greenwash' their poor environmental track records.
The world's biggest coral reef is facing increasing dangers stemming from climate change, including a historic global coral bleaching event driven by warming oceans. But environmental conservationists, including members of the Australia Greens party, say corporate sponsorship is no solution to the crisis.
"The most alarming part of this proposal is the potential for companies which are threatening the reef to buy positive reef branding to try to avert the reputational damage they deserve," Greens Senator Larissa Waters said on Wednesday, pointing out that the Australian government had also just given the green light to energy giant Adani to build the country's largest coal mine, ignoring widespread scientific opposition.
"It's a bit rich for the government to be cooking the reef with its coal obsession, and then wanting rich individuals to bail it out," she said, adding that the government should be using its own money to protect the marine site rather than looking for private investments.
Allowing coal companies to sponsor the Great Barrier Reef "would be like letting tobacco companies sponsor hospitals," Waters added.
In a federal brochure entitled "Partnerships for the Reef," the government-backed Reef Trust said it was looking for sponsorship, joint investments, and "collaborative arrangements." Among the projects are $1 million to improve seabird habitats, $1.5 million over three years to restore highly polluted riverbanks, and $7 million over three years to protect against coral loss from crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks.
"All Reef Trust investments will be recognised in branding of project materials, ranging from online publications and reports to social media activities and reef events," the brochure states.
To that idea, Waters countered, "While private donations for reef protection are welcome they shouldn't be in exchange for advertising rights and they must be on top of adequate public funding, not in place of it. What's next, naming rights, like for football stadiums?"
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
Australia is seeking corporate sponsors to fund a new Great Barrier Reef conservation initiative, sparking fears that big companies could invest in the endangered marine site to 'greenwash' their poor environmental track records.
The world's biggest coral reef is facing increasing dangers stemming from climate change, including a historic global coral bleaching event driven by warming oceans. But environmental conservationists, including members of the Australia Greens party, say corporate sponsorship is no solution to the crisis.
"The most alarming part of this proposal is the potential for companies which are threatening the reef to buy positive reef branding to try to avert the reputational damage they deserve," Greens Senator Larissa Waters said on Wednesday, pointing out that the Australian government had also just given the green light to energy giant Adani to build the country's largest coal mine, ignoring widespread scientific opposition.
"It's a bit rich for the government to be cooking the reef with its coal obsession, and then wanting rich individuals to bail it out," she said, adding that the government should be using its own money to protect the marine site rather than looking for private investments.
Allowing coal companies to sponsor the Great Barrier Reef "would be like letting tobacco companies sponsor hospitals," Waters added.
In a federal brochure entitled "Partnerships for the Reef," the government-backed Reef Trust said it was looking for sponsorship, joint investments, and "collaborative arrangements." Among the projects are $1 million to improve seabird habitats, $1.5 million over three years to restore highly polluted riverbanks, and $7 million over three years to protect against coral loss from crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks.
"All Reef Trust investments will be recognised in branding of project materials, ranging from online publications and reports to social media activities and reef events," the brochure states.
To that idea, Waters countered, "While private donations for reef protection are welcome they shouldn't be in exchange for advertising rights and they must be on top of adequate public funding, not in place of it. What's next, naming rights, like for football stadiums?"
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
Australia is seeking corporate sponsors to fund a new Great Barrier Reef conservation initiative, sparking fears that big companies could invest in the endangered marine site to 'greenwash' their poor environmental track records.
The world's biggest coral reef is facing increasing dangers stemming from climate change, including a historic global coral bleaching event driven by warming oceans. But environmental conservationists, including members of the Australia Greens party, say corporate sponsorship is no solution to the crisis.
"The most alarming part of this proposal is the potential for companies which are threatening the reef to buy positive reef branding to try to avert the reputational damage they deserve," Greens Senator Larissa Waters said on Wednesday, pointing out that the Australian government had also just given the green light to energy giant Adani to build the country's largest coal mine, ignoring widespread scientific opposition.
"It's a bit rich for the government to be cooking the reef with its coal obsession, and then wanting rich individuals to bail it out," she said, adding that the government should be using its own money to protect the marine site rather than looking for private investments.
Allowing coal companies to sponsor the Great Barrier Reef "would be like letting tobacco companies sponsor hospitals," Waters added.
In a federal brochure entitled "Partnerships for the Reef," the government-backed Reef Trust said it was looking for sponsorship, joint investments, and "collaborative arrangements." Among the projects are $1 million to improve seabird habitats, $1.5 million over three years to restore highly polluted riverbanks, and $7 million over three years to protect against coral loss from crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks.
"All Reef Trust investments will be recognised in branding of project materials, ranging from online publications and reports to social media activities and reef events," the brochure states.
To that idea, Waters countered, "While private donations for reef protection are welcome they shouldn't be in exchange for advertising rights and they must be on top of adequate public funding, not in place of it. What's next, naming rights, like for football stadiums?"
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.