Climate Cover-Up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming
List Price: $15.00 Our Price: $10.20 You Save: $4.80 (32%) Availability: | Temporarily out of stock. Order now and we'll deliver when available. We'll e-mail you with an estimated delivery date as soon as we have more information. Your credit card will not be charged until we ship the item. (as of 1:26 AM CT - detail) |
Product Description
Talk of global warming is nearly inescapable these days — but there are some who believe the concept of climate change is an elaborate hoax. Despite the input of the world’s leading climate scientists, the urgings of politicians, and the outcry of many grassroots activists, many Americans continue to ignore the warning signs of severe climate shifts. How did this happen? Climate Cover-up seeks to answer this question, describing the pollsters and public faces who have crafted careful language to refute the findings of environmental scientists. Exploring the PR techniques, phony "think tanks," and funding used to pervert scientific fact, this book serves as a wake-up call to those who still wish to deny the inconvenient truth.
Spotlight Customer Reviews:
Summary:
Why Skepticism Flourishes
|
Comment:
This is a great little book to show you why there is more skepticism about global warming now than just a few years ago. Despite the overwhelming scientific evidence of damage to the climate and oceans from anthropogenic CO2 emissions the denial industry has not died. In fact it seems more effective than ever. This book does quite a good job of showing how this has happened and why scientists have not been effective communicators of the results of their studies in the mainstream media.
An interesting example from the book explained google searches (you can check this yourself). Type in "global warming" and the first page or even two of hits will be global warming denial websites.
This book continues where the excellent book by Jeremy Leggett "The Carbon War, Global Warming and the End of the Oil Era" left off after its publication in 2001.
The only reason I did not give 5 stars to this is that I wish this book would have included at least a short highlight chapter of recent findings of global warming/climate change and ocean acidification. This would have added to the book and perhaps satisfied more readers (as reviewed above). Without this it is still an excellent chronicle and explanation of the significant effect of those that have a financial interest in preventing recognition and action on global warming.
|
Summary:
A different approach to Global Warming books
|
Comment:
This book piqued my interest the moment I saw the subtitle - "The Crusade to Deny Global Warming". I have to admit that I'm from the center-left of the political spectrum so I know the facts (I have an environmental studies minor in my BA) but was interested in what the author (James Hoggan) had to say about the "cover-up" that's occurring in today's polarized political (and mass media) climate.
Though I don't have a journalistic background, I've grown up learning to inquire and investigate. The author wants to make one point clear -- and it's apparent in all seventeen chapters -- "check [the] credentials" of anyone who's trying to promote a point. PR spin is everywhere and we must learn to identify fact from fiction (something perhaps much of the public today can't do). Critics of global warming implant doubt into the vulnerable.
I found the first half of the book very intriguing, though the second half seem to ramble a tad. Some of the same "skeptics" points seemed to get repeated over several chapters (I think too much time was spent on "clean" coal.) At times I felt the book would be better as an online journal rather than an book -- it's certainly not an academic monograph, but somewhere in between that and casual non-fiction. The author is a blogger and that writing style is apparent in this title. I was expecting more references and bibliography, yet there are only a few endnotes. It's not that the author isn't convincing, but from time to time I wanted to check our more of his sources. Nonetheless, his exposés of "courts and cash", "balance vs. accuracy", media consumption, and politics are still convincing. You'll clearly learn names interviewed in the media you'll want to avoid -- there's plenty of name calling.
As with any polemic topic, I agree that the key to debunking the myth is vigilance, leadership, and information gathering by the public. A worthwhile read -- no matter what side of the fence you're on with global warming. I already knew it was common sense that we need to do something to prevent significant climate change; hopefully some deniers are brought over to the other side of the fence after reading.
|
Summary:
Old news to those of us who follow such things, but still nice to get more
|
Comment:
During the 1970s and 1980s Martin Gardner and James Randi spent a great deal of effort on debunking the Human Potential movement, both the "psychics" and other assorted con artists themselves and the overly credulous scientists who attempted to validate them. The overarching theme to their work was that when dealing with the paranormal, the obvious people to do the data collection were not scientists (who tend not to deal in intentional sneakiness) but magicians (who do it for a living and know what to look for, and which Gardner and Randi famously are). So if it takes a magician to spot a phony psychic, who but a PR guy to rat out other PR guys?
Honestly, if you've read books like Trust Us We're Experts, you already have a pretty good idea of what you're going to find in here. And indeed you do find a good number of the Usual Suspects -- Republican pollster Frank Luntz, professional bull**** artist Steven Milloy, big business (in this case, energy companies, particularly coal users), right-wing politicians and thinktanks, scientists for sale (often working outside their specialties), and the usual cast of characters involved in anti-science obfuscation ploys. It's all painfully familiar, though Hoggan gives enough background in the nuts and bolts for someone who hasn't studied it much. And chapter 6, "Mangling the Language", is one of the better introductions to the way political flacks create dog whistles and other assorted code words so people won't stop to think about what they're really talking about. Along the way, Hoggan investigates absurdities such as "clean coal", as well as the constant harrassment of climate scientists and advocates like James Hansen and Al Gore.
More important, though, is the book's evaluation of the nature of fear and confusion -- the PR teams involved in manufacturing the global warming controversy have in many cases successfully brought attempts to take action to a halt by putting relatively uneducated politicians in no-win situations -- without good information to act, politicians are afraid of criticism from big-money constituents and feel it safer to err on the side of building the economy. And that, fundamentally, is what denialism is all about -- the people pushing the controversy know that, among climatologists, there is no controversy. In their drive to protect industry's bottom line, they have to push the line that climatologists don't know what they're talking about, and with a public already trained to distrust expertise, that's rather easy. So no, Hoggan and his coauthor Littlemore aren't really scientists, but they can recognize a PR scam when they see one.
|
Summary:
You Can Prove This Book's Point Yourself!
|
Comment:
You can prove Hoggan's thesis for yourself! It's interesting, if scary. Do a search for Interent articles on global warming (Hoggan notes this term is being re-sold as the less scary "climate change" by denier PR professionals) and look for any article claiming that actual science contridicts the warming phenomenon. Then see if you can track back what is quoted in THAT article to its original source.
When I tried this experiment, I found that the denier web site claimed the opposite of what the original scientific author had said. Hoggan uncovers the strategy of deniers: to make it appear that there is a scientific "debate" on GW. Unfortunately, this approach is insidiously effective.
There is no scientific debate - only facts on one hand and professional deniers on the other. But the illusion of "debate" lingers....and the PR professionals have done their job: putting off till the future what we need to do today.
|
Summary:
To Hell with the Science
|
Comment:
In the late 1980s, there had already been many years of observation and research about global warming. Scientists and political leaders were agreed that climate change was real, that it was caused by human activity, and that it could lead to catastrophe. Margaret Thatcher of Great Britain, George H. W. Bush of the United States, and Brian Mulroney of Canada all came into office pledging action.
Today, twenty years on, public policy worldwide is stalled, emissions are higher than ever, and polls show massive public confusion about the data and about what the scientists think.
How could something like that have happened? The Climate Cover-Up, written by public relations professional James Hoggan, shows us. Hoggan tells the story of the energy industry's multimillion dollar campaign of propaganda lobbying. In his pages we meet the campaign's major players and observe its techniques and tactics.
Judged against its objectives, the campaign has been a brilliant success. Its authors managed to prevent emission controls worldwide and to obstruct the development and adoption of cleaner energy technologies. For an investment of a few tens of millions, energy companies have reaped billions in profits. Hoggan, a committed partisan on the climate change issue, argues that they have also done a terrible disservice to humanity.
Here's what a reader of this book can expect:
* A history of the energy industry's "denier" - as in denying climate change - campaign.
* An abundantly-documented argument that industry and its allies have deliberately lied, and that media and government have enabled them to do so.
* A detailed account of denier tactics, which include fake think-tanks which are really propaganda outfits, fake publications, fake experts, fake (Astroturf) grassroots organizations, hidden funding channels, huge budgets to elect friendly politicians, threats to sue critics, and so on.
* A clear account of the widespread agreement among researchers, what Hoggan calls the scientific consensus, about the reality and causes of climate change.
* Abundant references to web sites, books and articles on both sides of the public debate, where the reader can follow up on points of interest.
This book is not the place to go for a review of the science itself. Hoggan is not a scientist, and he doesn't pretend to be one. He references the science, but he keeps the book's focus on the denier campaign. As a PR professional himself, Hoggan knows good work when he sees it. He often expresses admiration for the professionalism of the campaign, even as he condemns its dishonesty and its purpose.
A few examples from the book may whet the reader's appetite.
* An industry-funded think-tank in the 1990s shelved a report from its own scientists when they affirmed that global warming is real and fossil fuel burning is causing it.
* The American Enterprise Institute offered $10,000 each to scientists willing to criticize the 2007 IPCC report before it had even been published.
* Exxon alone spends more than $2 million per year to confuse the public about global warming. When the Royal Society of London wrote them a letter in 2006 asking them to desist, they said they would - but they didn't.
* The American Petroleum Institute is running a campaign explicitly stating that "victory" depends on getting the public to think that those promoting the Kyoto treaty are "out of touch with reality."
* Out of 141 books published between 1982 and 2005 that deny the seriousness of environmental problems, 132 were written by industry-funded think tanks or by individuals affiliated with them.
* The energy industry has become increasingly partisan. Money from oil, gas, coal, utility and related insustries used to favor Republicans over Democrats by 60/40. Nowadays the Democratic share is down to 10 to 20 percent.
* Among peer-reviewed scientific papers on global climate change published between 1993 and 2003, not a single one out of 923 found any valid reason to deny the reality of climate change or the human role in causing it. Among articles on the subject in leading newspapers between 1998 and 2003, more than half represented the viewpoints of spokesmen denying exactly that. This gives the public the impression that scientists disagree among themselves - which is what the fossil fuel industries want us to think.
* The Bush White House played the denier game with a vengeance, using manifestly unqualified but politically reliable individuals to edit government reports, delete unwelcome portions of prepared testimony, and to supervise government scientists' contact with the press.
Hoggan introduced me to a set of underlying principles of climate change denial. In my own words, I would summarize them like this:
* Sell the idea that there is a scientific controversy.
* When a scientist is interviewed, make sure you are invited to present "the other side".
* Hide your industry funding, even if it means breaking the law.
* Set up or support "think tanks" to make your message seem more scientific.
* To give your message more credibility, pretend to be grassroots.
* Media are too busy to follow up, so overwhelm them with slanted info.
* Pay much as necessary to hire spokespeople. Pretend they are scientists whether they are or not. If they are scientists, pretend they are experts, whether they are or not.
* Write books full of misrepresentations and scientific dishonesty.
* Sign up scientists onto statements that don't represent their thinking.
* Never apologize, never correct, never retract..
* When scientists criticize your work, exploit it to say "See! Even scientists don't agree among themselves!"
* When you do make a legitimate criticism of a scientist, exploit their correction to say "See! Their work is faulty!"
* Don't do any actual research or review the published data. Spend all your money on PR.
* Work with other industry allies to talk up each other's points, thereby creating and "echo chamber."
* Always have a fallback argument. The world isn't getting warmer, but if it is getting warmer, it's by an insignificant amount, and if the amount isn't insignificant, it's been warmer in the past, and if it hasn't been warmer in the past, it's a natural phenomenon, and if it isn't natural, it is a good thing, and if it's a bad thing, it's too expensive to address, and if it isn't too expensive, it's not a high enough priority, and if it is enough of a priority, then it would wreck the economy, and so on.
I would recommend this book to anyone, whatever they think about the climate change issue. Once you finish this book, you will understand that the energy industry is not trying to engage the science but to conceal it, is not trying to participate in an informed public debate but to forestall one. If they truly thought the scientific consensus was wrong, they would try to produce better science to refute it, but that's not what they do. They spend no money on climate research or even on reviewing the existing literature. Their entire budget is devoted to PR and lobbying.
No one, whatever they think about global warming, could possibly conclude that industry has ever even tried to be honest about this. On an issue with such dire implications, their behavior is unconscionable.
|
|