Slashdot Mirror
The Software Big Oil's PR Firm Uses To "Convert Average Citizens"
merbs writes The CEO of the world's largest PR firm has a policy when it comes to campaigns that focus on the environment. "We do not work with astroturf groups and we have never created a website for a client with the intent to deny climate change," Richard Edelman wrote in a blog post in August. That may actually turn out to be true. Technically. Edelman may not work with astroturf groups. Instead, it appears to prefer to build them itself, from the ground up, using sophisticated proprietary software platform designed to "convert" advocates and then "track" their behavior.
Why would they need sophisticated software when there are so many denialist Libertarian types who seem to believe that dumping millions of years worth of sequestered CO2 into the atmosphere in the space of three centuries has absolutely no ill effects whatsoever? After all, these people show up on every single web forum anywhere to declare climatologists are frauds and AGW a global conspiracy of evil Communists out to destroy the economy...
Oh wait
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Otherwise they would have *two* problems.
I wonder if their software can call up merbs oil company and cancel his deliveries? Have a nice winter all you global crybabies.
They're not polluting the ocean, they're adding an extra feature: flammability. Ocean 2.0.
Anyone who disagrees with the Group Think is a denier.
Their job is to lie by saying things that may be true, technically. (At least when they're dealing with entrenched interests working against the public good to maximize profit.)
This is the same thing that every company big enough to do public relations at all does, except it's being described using inflammatory terminology.
This was said to a pro-global warming group. The CEO of the world's largest PR firm has a policy of saying what the client wants to hear....
Does the same. They hire the same sort of people, pay the same sort of money, and use the same tactics (and many worse ones).
Except they're getting all whiny because it's not working for them on the Keystone XL thing, so they're trying the old "those evil, mind-controlling oil companies" story on a different class of public relations targets.
Astroturfing is the increasingly popular tactic wherein corporations sponsor front groups or manufacture the appearance of grassroots support to simulate a genuine social movement that is rallying for goals in line with their profit motive. end quote. it's Everyone (see Bloomberg's Everytown), not just corporations. so the definition given for Astroturfing is designed for the reporter's PR motive.
...every last one of you AGW freaks who drone on about tobacco eagerly take any opportunity to smoke weed...which shrinks your brain.
Hmmm...interesting...enviro wackos and pot smokers and shrunken brains.
I recall reading something a few years back (but I can't find a link, so take this with a grain of salt) where Amazon was reported to have or at least claimed to have very high employee satisfaction and/or safety. However, the only reason they do so is because the vast majority of their warehouses are staffed and managed by third parties, who work their employees quite hard for low wages. Because it's the third parties that do the hiring and management, technically they aren't Amazon employees, and so aren't included in metrics (internal or external.)
I'm sure other companies have spouted the truthy line of "We do not astroturf" (because we hire third party marketing companies, tell them simply to "improve our image", and they astroturf for us.) This seems like another type of that shell game, where they say "We do not astroturf (the software we buy from companies to improve our image astroturfs for us.)"
How long until they start hiring botnets to generate pseudo-random favorable posts? "We do not astroturf (the hackers we found on craigslist get the internet to astroturf for us.)"
And it's working like a charm... Good move fellas... You're guaranteed a packed house...
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
It worked on me.Or maybe it is the $$$$$ I have made in energy stocks. Are you all going to let your leftist teachers talk you out of a better future through fossil fuels? I don't see how you can stop us now that the liberals got their brains beat out in the elections.
an ill wind that blows no good
Astroturfing;
Paying people/companies to make statements they do not believe to support a cause.
Not Astroturfing;
Convincing someone you view is correct and providing a venue to display these actual honest views.
Labeling something astroturfing does not mean it really is astroturfing. Why shouldn't a company be able to show statements made by people who are not paid to make them? The environmental lobby does it all the time.
So now convincing people of your point of view is astroturfing? Nice try.
What? The Software Big Oil? What does that mean? Another headline fail. You can't just string words along without any clue as to how they're meant to be parsed. It doesn't have to be difficult to write coherent headlines:
"Software used by Big Oil's PR firm effectively shapes public opinion" actually parses and makes sense.
Cue the chucklefucks arguing about obamacare or global warming as if it were remotely relevant, the out-of-the-woodwork fake right-wing ACs complaining about "environmentalist whackos", shaggy dog story nonsense filler comments, etc. Paid oil shills: the same scripts every time, guaranteed, from the same minimum wage losers.
Are they hiring you losers while still in high school these days? The bar for paid oil trolls sure is a low one--any stupid thing to prevent the discussion of the oil cartel's impunity. Do the world a favor and kill yourself.
As I've repeatedly pointed out, you've never written down the very first energy conservation equation without wrongly "cancelling" terms. You've only provided this incorrect Sky Dragon Slayer equation:
No. Once again, that's absurd, Jane.
A Dunning-Kruger victim would only consider the possibility that professional physicists are incompetent or dishonest. A real skeptic would at least consider the possibility that professional physicists understand physics better than they do, and that the physicists are trying to point out a genuine fundamental flaw in the skeptic's argument.
Here's how to use the principle of conservation of energy. Draw a boundary around the heat source:
power in = electrical heating power + radiative power in from the chamber walls
power out = radiative power out from the heat source
Since power in = power out through any boundary where nothing inside is changing:
electrical heating power + radiative power in from the chamber walls = radiative power out from the heat source
Jane got the very first equation wrong, because Jane refuses to write down an energy conservation equation for a boundary around the source without wrongly "cancelling" terms. If he tried to do this just once, he'd realize that electrical heating power depends on the cooler chamber wall temperature.
This is all clearly too difficult for Jane, despite the fact that this is the very first equation necessary to solve this problem. Because Jane is so far out of his depth, I suggested that Jane ask a physicist he respects this simple question:
@ProfBrianCox, an electrically heated plate is in a vacuum chamber with cooler walls.
Does heating power depend on the wall temperature?
If Jane were a real skeptic, he'd at least ask a physicist he respects this simple question. But Jane refuses. Why?
It's pretty clear that Jane refuses to ask this simple question because he's just scared Prof. Cox (or any other mainstream physicist) will say "yes", which would mean that Jane's entire calculation is wrong, from the very first equation.
Anyone who doesn't want to listen to Rujiel repeatedly tell me to kill myself should note that Jane keeps spreading Sky Dragon Slayer misinformation here.