Exxon Mobil has some explaining to do, said Justin Gillis and Clifford Krauss at The New York Times. The oil giant is being investigated by the New York attorney general over whether it lied to its investors and the public about the risks of climate change. For decades, Exxon Mobil allegedly poured money into outside groups dedicated to undermining the scientific case for climate change, even as the company's own scientists warned Exxon executives about the potential environmental consequences of burning fossil fuels. Some legal experts are already comparing the inquiry to the multibillion-dollar lawsuits brought against Big Tobacco for fudging the health impact of smoking. Depending on what the investigation finds, we may soon see a "legal assault on fossil fuel companies."
Exxon knew as early as the 1970s that carbon dioxide emissions from burning oil and gas "could have dire effects on the Earth," said Timothy Egan, also at the Times. But instead of coming clean, the company engineered a disinformation campaign "Soviet-era propagandists would be proud of." By the time Exxon cut off funding for climate change deniers in the mid-2000s and admitted that humans were largely to blame for the Earth's warming, the damage had been done. Republican presidential candidates in 2015, "with a far bigger megaphone than Exxon ever had," continue to spout "the very junk science" hatched in its boardroom.
"If you care about free speech," said Robert Samuelson at The Washington Post, the campaign against Exxon should trouble you. For one thing, it's a real stretch to blame Exxon for our own foot dragging in addressing climate change. The millions of Americans who revile Big Oil "are not uncritical consumers of industry propaganda." We should also be wary of any government effort to punish a company for essentially "expressing its opinions." Those opinions may be smart or stupid, sensible or self-interested; "whatever, they deserve protection." Scapegoating Exxon for global warming is a "political cheap shot." More like a "witch hunt," said Holman Jenkins Jr. at The Wall Street Journal. Exxon's climate research has been conducted in public view for decades, with the "allegedly damning documents" about a stealthy misinformation campaign coming from peer-reviewed journals and Exxon's own website. The company's real crime is not subscribing to the very specific vision of "climate doom" endorsed by environmentalists, who want draconian restrictions on fossil fuels.
"Lying to the public is the American way," said Matt Levine at Bloomberg View. It's also perfectly legal. Lying to investors, on the other hand, is what we call "fraud." And that's where Exxon could be in trouble. Misleading the public about science and policy "are everyday parts of our great democracy." But deceptions about science's possible effect on your stock price risks a securities fraud investigation, especially in New York state, where the attorney general has broad powers to prosecute financial fraud. There's a distinct limit to any company's claim to free speech. "Corporations are people, perhaps, but they're not quite as free as you might have thought."
http://theweek.com/articles/588404/exxon-mobils-slippery-climate-science
Exxon knew as early as the 1970s that carbon dioxide emissions from burning oil and gas "could have dire effects on the Earth," said Timothy Egan, also at the Times. But instead of coming clean, the company engineered a disinformation campaign "Soviet-era propagandists would be proud of." By the time Exxon cut off funding for climate change deniers in the mid-2000s and admitted that humans were largely to blame for the Earth's warming, the damage had been done. Republican presidential candidates in 2015, "with a far bigger megaphone than Exxon ever had," continue to spout "the very junk science" hatched in its boardroom.
"If you care about free speech," said Robert Samuelson at The Washington Post, the campaign against Exxon should trouble you. For one thing, it's a real stretch to blame Exxon for our own foot dragging in addressing climate change. The millions of Americans who revile Big Oil "are not uncritical consumers of industry propaganda." We should also be wary of any government effort to punish a company for essentially "expressing its opinions." Those opinions may be smart or stupid, sensible or self-interested; "whatever, they deserve protection." Scapegoating Exxon for global warming is a "political cheap shot." More like a "witch hunt," said Holman Jenkins Jr. at The Wall Street Journal. Exxon's climate research has been conducted in public view for decades, with the "allegedly damning documents" about a stealthy misinformation campaign coming from peer-reviewed journals and Exxon's own website. The company's real crime is not subscribing to the very specific vision of "climate doom" endorsed by environmentalists, who want draconian restrictions on fossil fuels.
"Lying to the public is the American way," said Matt Levine at Bloomberg View. It's also perfectly legal. Lying to investors, on the other hand, is what we call "fraud." And that's where Exxon could be in trouble. Misleading the public about science and policy "are everyday parts of our great democracy." But deceptions about science's possible effect on your stock price risks a securities fraud investigation, especially in New York state, where the attorney general has broad powers to prosecute financial fraud. There's a distinct limit to any company's claim to free speech. "Corporations are people, perhaps, but they're not quite as free as you might have thought."
http://theweek.com/articles/588404/exxon-mobils-slippery-climate-science