Slashdot Mirror
PR Firm Behind Al Gore YouTube Spoof?
mytrip writes to tell us ABC News is reporting that a supposed amateur video posted to YouTube.com may have actually been designed and posted by a Republican public relations firm called DCI. From the article: "Public relations firms have long used computer technology to create bogus grassroots campaigns, which are called 'Astroturf.' Now these firms are being hired to push illusions on the Internet to create the false impression of real people blogging, e-mailing and making films."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZSqXUSwHRI
And if any PR company produced that, they're seriously over paid.
So, he, uh, flew on a plane all by himself?
By the way, maybe you should go see "An Inconvenient Truth." There's a lot of needless Gore biography, but the major point is that we can reduce a lot of CO2 emissions WITHOUT changing our lifestyles. Instead we need to stop being cheap bastards (and stop glad-handing our corrupt and inefficient industries) and pony up for some simple investments and regulations (like matching European and Asian fuel efficiency and investing in something other than coal power).
Repetition does not transform a lie into the truth. - FDR
If it was a parody of Linux, it would be considered fair use. It's not a parody of Linux. Therefore, it's trademark and copyright infringement.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
I keep hearing that statistic about his use of air fuel, but should he take a rowboat to China? You didn't see the movie probably- and I'm not saying anyone's "obligated" to do so. The message, however, as far as I can tell was very calm: This is a legit problem (spends a whole bunch of time on that- demonstrating things are a indeed bit amiss) but w/ some adjustments in efficiency and other areas this is a problem that does not need to be a problem. His presentation is not a call to abolish jetliners as we know it or make everyone get out and walk to work. At best, you could call him a hypocrite w/o any other way to get his ideas out yet. You make it personal (I guess as I'm doing w/ you right now) and miss the argument entirely- unable to weigh its merits. That last jab at 'ol Al for making that wacky statement that he invented the internet... check this out: http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp But ignore all this, since you seem more interested in information from the "competitive enterprise institute" or the DCI Group- folks who like when they can get others to roll their eyes and dismiss new ideas.
Actually, DCI has ExxonMobil as a client.
The Moo went "Cow!"
If you submit this search on YouTube, you'll also see the following counter-submissions:
Re: Al Gore's Penguin Army
Al Gore's Penguin Army - Propaganda
'Al Gore's Penguin Army' Misuses Linux Mascot!
Some detective work on where he mailed from. But don't tell them, they made this mistake before, and will hopefully do it again.7 6.htm
"Monsanto's PR firm admits involvement in e-mail campaign to discredit scientists"
(2002)
http://www.ethicalinvesting.com/monsanto/news/100
You're joking, right? I'd estimate 99% of the replies to this article on Slashdot are people with pre-formed hard-boiled views who are just pushing their side or looking for people who agree with them.
/. poster has no such interest. Even those of us, like me, who are heavily invested in the stock market, are mostly smart enough to be well-diversified, and therefore not hugely exposed to a downturn in the fosil energy sector.
Perhaps English is not your first language. This is one of those subtle aspects of English that give non-native-speakers quite legitimate fits.
"Dis-interested" in this context means that you do not have a financial interest in a given position.
The CEO of a company that is embedded in the hydrocarbon economy--an oil, coal or automobile company, to name but a few examples--has an interest in convincing people that global warming is nothing to worry about, because their company's profits and the CEO's fat bonus and golden handshake depends on it.
The average
"Dis-interested" does not mean "has no opinion." It means, "has no non-rational (financial , religious or similar) reason for pushing a particular opinion over others."
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
Not sure why the article doesn't link to the video, but after searching around, found this:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IZSqXUSwHRI
-Bill
SlashSig Karma: Excellent (mostly affected by moderatio
You phrased these lines in a typical deceptive way. What you should have said was "LIBERALS brought an end to slavery in America." Remember that the Republican party was the left leaning party in the 19th century and the democrats where the conservative right wing party.
unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
I suggest that you go find some real scientists of the climate sciences and ask them for their opinion on the causes of global warming. There's practically consensus ( http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/570 2/1686 ) among workers in the field that the recent global warming is a man-made phenomenon.
n _climate_change#Survey_of_US_state_climatologists, the only "against" I could find on that page. A quick background check reveals http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Citizen s_for_a_Sound_Economy.
That so many have begun questioning this is a testimony to the effectiveness of recent PR campaigns from those who'd suffer from regulations.
Please don't just take my word for it though. Do the research yourself. Find workers in the field and ask them for their opinion. Find web pages and articles that discredit the theory that humans caused global warming and DO BACKGROUND RESEARCH ON THE AUTHORS. That last point cannot be stressed well enough, as it will reveal a disturbing pattern of vested interests and hidden sponsors.
As an example, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_o
I recommend the book "Trust Us, We're Experts" to anyone wanting to get insight into how the modern PR industry operates.
Ulf Magnusson