Skip to comments.Why the latest anti-Keystone pipeline ad is a low blow to Canada
Posted on 09/10/2013 7:55:58 AM PDT by CedarDave
CALGARY An anti-Keystone XL pipeline commercial funded by President Barack Obama supporter and hedge-fund billionaire Tom Steyer confirms what many Canadians have long suspected American anti-oil activists have gone mad.
The commercial was intended to be aired Tuesday evening on WRC-TV, an affiliate of NBC in Washington, D.C., to coincide with the presidents appearance on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno.
The commercial is so offensive the station refused to air it. While intended as a parody, it insults TransCanada Corp. CEO Russ Girling, whose company is proposing Keystone XL; its a low blow to Canada; and it shows the anti-Keystone campaign is in desperate need of adult supervision.
It is evident from the bizarre advertorials contempt for the truth that its sponsor wishes to mislead the public, ridicule and demonize the project and tarnish Canadas strong environmental record, Canadas Natural Resources Minister, Joe Oliver, said in an email. This is unfortunate since the project would enhance North Americas energy security, create jobs and contribute to environmental stewardship on both sides of the border.
(Excerpt) Read more at business.financialpost.com ...
I can’t get too worked up about this. If the oil interests are too stingy to gin up their own ads, they deserve to lose.
Actually, ANYONE with the “activist” designation is usually mad.
Really? You think there should be no repercussions to explicit lying that hurts the US economy, that sends more dollars to overseas nations and OPEC members?
If the oil companies don't tell their own lies and make them entertaining they deserve to lose? Who really loses in that scenario?
Next up will be Obama demanding airstrikes on Ottawa.
It's a cost of doing business. You will always have interests working against you. I guess if this were an absolute monarchy, the king could dictate that the pipeline has to be built. That not being the case, if they want their pipeline, they had better get going. And if you're going to be spending time promoting their cause, you should seriously think about talking to their PR department about getting paid. Because everyone else who's involved in the effort certainly is, on both sides of the issue.
:: If the oil interests are too stingy to gin up their own ads, they deserve to lose. ::
Thank God you don’t run the PR Department of any oil company.
Years of ridicule has shown the O&G industry that mass-appeal ads don’t work. Pump-prices are the O&G PR campaign. The mass-advertisements are on the station placrds in dollars and 1/ 100oths.
Prices down, America loves them; prices up, America hates them. Rather simple, really.
Imagine an ad showing those prices going up without the pipeline, and going down with the pipeline. It's also possible that oil execs are too conservative and veto any provocative ads that might work.
Publishing lies against a business is acceptable to you then? It should be accepted as just another business tactic?
If someone competing for your job published lies about you being a child molester, would you have the same attitude? That it was your job to be a better publisher of your own lies about them?
Wow, sadly it will be effective. Americans no longer understand basic supply and demand.
My favorite misrepresentation is how more supply will INCREASE prices. Yeah, that always happens. If this were true, the opposite would also be true. Less supply will decrease prices. Economics for the galactically stupid.
What practical steps could they take? Are these enviro-screeds annoying? Sure. But getting worked up about them isn't very productive and in a free society, you simply need to factor them in. The alternative is to operate only in countries run by dictatorships, which carries its own set of problems.
Just remember, Obama’s foreign policy is to distance the US from all of its old and trusted allies. It seems to be working.
Enforce the existing libel/slander laws for a start.
The oil companies are a perpetual target and there’s just little point in arguing their case in an unfriendly media.
Look at what happened with the Wolverine pipeline here in Michigan. They were in the process of refurbishing the entire length from Alma south when they had the spill in Jackson. They lost millions when the state shut them down.
Even doing upgrades on a pipeline is a dangerous proposition for a company. As soon as the crack the earth over a pipeline, the DEQ and every environmentalist within a thousand miles comes running to cause trouble and cost money.
: It’s also possible that oil execs are too conservative and veto any provocative ads that might work. ::
And that’s bad because...why?
Because it would be amusing to see non-stodgy conservative ads, for a change, oxymoronic as it might sound.
Refer back my Crip’s post 16.
key phrase: “unfriendly media”; I’ll up that to “a vicious media”
Even in nature, the challenging male doesn’t display on the dominant male’s territory.