It is in the interest of our most powerful and profitable industries to manufacture doubt among the public as well as manufacture products and pollutants.
Global warming is a threat to big business. In the American capitalist market, businesses maximize their profits by eliminating all unnecessary costs. Global warming is “a gradual increase in the overall temperature of the earth’s atmosphere” that is caused by “increased levels of carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons, and other pollutants.” (Amanda MacMillan, nrdc.org). These pollutants are emitted in high volumes by the oil, automobile, and other manufacturing industries. If the public believes that human action and pollutants are the cause of global warming, then the impending environmental regulations would negatively impact these big businesses by imposing an added cost that they are unwilling to pay. In an effort to shift public opinion, many manufacturers and conservative organizations have attempted to discredit the science behind global warming by obscuring the scientific consensus of human causation. The goal is to undermine the public’s confidence in the scientific findings so that environmental regulations become unfounded and obsolete. These campaigns are often lead by conservative politicians and leaders in manufacturing industries who are opposed to the regulation of pollution emissions. Public disinformation has been spread for decades from big businesses that need to push corporate agendas. It seems that it is in the interest of our most powerful and profitable industries to manufacture doubt among the public as well as manufacture products and pollutants.
Politicians, particularly right-leaning conservatives, support big business and capitalist markets. When faced with possible environmental regulations under the Obama Administration in 2014, Republican Senator John Barrasso attempted to influence the beliefs and actions of his peers by discrediting global warming science. He commented that the “climate is constantly changing” and that “the role human activity plays is not known.” (Bob Cusack, thehill.com)
When asked about his position on regulation, Barrasso indicated that “regulations will harm the economy”. This argument is effectively interfering with the free flow of accurate information because it discredits scientific studies that have found conclusive evidence attributing global warming to human action. Barrasso uses the “straw-man” argument to create a fictitious problem with the scientific research. He perpetuates this fake problem by discrediting the science involved and contributing to the ongoing fabricated controversy. He expresses his own doubts about the conclusiveness of the research in the hopes that he will influence other members of the Senate to question their acceptance of global warming. Another Republican Senator, Marco Rubio, also attempted to influence the Senate’s beliefs by stating that human activity is not causing the “dramatic changes to our climate the way these scientists are portraying it.” (Bob Cusack, thehill.com). In this way, Rubio and Barrasso work together to create an out-group by blaming the scientists for providing inconclusive evidence and portraying only the data that supports their claim of human causation. As conservatives, Barrasso and Rubio are biased to support big business and oppose environmental regulation legislation aimed at reducing climate change trends. Such regulations would negatively impact the profit margins of businesses. It is therefore in the interest of large manufacturers as well as their supporting politicians to discredit global warming claims. Measures to reduce global warming will also reduce corporate profits.
“I don’t believe in climate change.” This remark, pulled from a 2015 presidential candidacy interview with Donald Trump, exemplifies the use of testimonial to influence public opinion. Mr. Trump used his prestige and position to gain media attention for his agenda on climate change. Many Americans are inclined to listen to what Mr. Trump has to say due to his position as a presidential candidate and eventually as the President of the United States. As a conservative business man and politician, Mr. Trump has many motivations to create doubt regarding global warming. It is in his best interest to preserve the profit margins of his business as well as support capitalist market structure. Mr. Trump uses false dichotomy to present the climate change argument as an oversimplified, black-and-white issue by upholding the idea that you either believe in climate change or you do not. In a tweet posted in 2015, Mr. Trump observes, “Wow, 25 degrees below zero, record cold and snow spell. Global warming anyone?” Trump’s outright denial of the existence of climate change creates doubt among Americans by presenting the opposing side of the global warming argument. It could even be considered “the big lie” tactic because the lie is so outrageous that people will actually believe that it must be rooted in truth. The entire Trump Administration has reportedly “served up every flavor of climate denial” whether it was “dismissing global warming as a hoax, questioning humanity’s role in it, exaggerating the unknowns, playing down the urgency of action, or playing up the costs” (insideclimatenews.org).
In 2004, the “Americans for Prosperity” foundation was founded by David Koch of Koch Industries. The foundation was created as a nonprofit alliance of conservatives to fight for “lower taxes, less government regulation, and economic prosperity for all” (americansforprosperity.org). This mission has served as an effective cover for underlying climate change denial movements in the organization. Americans for Prosperity proudly boasts that they “fight for freedom”. The use of “freedom” as an omnibus word in this context contributes to their ability to manipulate the public’s opinions and behaviors towards the actions of the foundation. The Americans for Prosperity website claims a “standing ground force of activists” that are ready to fight for the values and beliefs of AFP. They use astroturfing to simulate a grassroots movement, even mentioning that members are “active in your neighborhood” (americansforprosperity.org). This supposed grassroots movement is supported by the “Hot Air Tour” that was sponsored by Americans for Prosperity. This tour launched hundreds of hot air balloons plastered with “Climate Change Alarmism” to claim that climate change was causing increased government regulation as well as a restriction to individual freedom. As conservatives, and specifically large business owners in the case of David Koch, it is in the interests of Americans for Prosperity to advocate for less government regulation. They do this by manipulating the minds of the public and getting Americans to associate climate change with the negative connotation surrounding regulation or restricted freedom. In this way, AFP is effectively using the transfer method to make people associate opposition to regulation with denial of global warming. They have rallied support for the denial of climate change because they want to reduce the chances of government regulations. The argument has been set up in a way that makes it difficult for anyone to disagree. How could you disagree with an organization that fights for freedom? The goal of Americans for Prosperity is to make the public believe that the denial of climate change will restrict the government’s power and expand our individual freedoms.
Since the late 1980s, a cloud of doubt has been created by industries, organizations, and politicians regarding climate change. These institutions have strong financial and political incentives to deny the existence of global warming. Through political testimonials, lobbying, advertisements, and media attention, those who doubt global warming have been able to argue that the science behind global warming is inconclusive and flawed, and that climate change is unrelated to human activity. Fabricated controversy and doubt have, for the most part, shielded manufacturing industries from potential litigation and regulation. They use propaganda techniques to expertly manipulate the beliefs and actions of the public by planting seeds of doubt that grow into full blown denial of global warming. They have successfully created the illusion of a debate that has supported the case against any decisive action regarding climate change. It is our social responsibility as an advanced society to provide access to accurate and free flowing information. Propaganda techniques attempt to manipulate public opinion and therefore obstruct the free flow of information to the citizens. These techniques are ethically wrong because they don’t allow people to make informed decisions or opinions. The public should have access to the truth, and they don’t deserve to be manipulated. Our country’s top executives and industry leaders are focusing on manufacturing doubt among the public rather than manufacturing quality products and services as they should. If our society’s information systems continue to be rooted in propaganda, we will be unable to advance as a knowledgeable and well-informed community.