4 ms·
Seems to me if it doesn't help, then the ads weren't doing anything anyway, so they're doing fossil fuel companies a favor by saving them money that they were w
by bamfly 3y ago
Seems to me if it doesn't help, then the ads weren't doing anything anyway, so they're doing fossil fuel companies a favor by saving them money that they were wasting.
- zirgs 3y agoThe ads might influence which fossil fuel supplier people will pick, but in the end they have to pick someone, because we can't even get food without burning fossil fuels somewhere.
- bamfly 3y agoNot all ads are sales ads. This is especially true for huge industries with a few major players and strong industry associations & lobbying groups. Double-especially true for such industries that also have a serious negative-externality problem and are facing significant regulatory risk. A quick image search for "[name of fossil fuel company] ad"—plus, just having seen lots of these ads over the years, in the wild—suggests that much of that spending is about PR and influencing policy opinions of voters, not trying to sell me some particular product. As you keep writing, the fuel that's needed will be purchased anyway, so the main effect of this would be reducing the reach of corporate PR (i.e. bullshit) campaigns. Seems like a cheap and easy win to me, and a service to their readers.