I guess we should have expected this: Al Gore's Alliance for Climate Change is about to spend $100 million a year advertising global warming alarmism.
I'm thanking God right now for a wonderful invention called the DVR.
How 'bout you?
Unfortunately, those around the country without such technology are apparently about to be deluged with climate change hysteria according to Advertising Age (emphasis added throughout):
Four elite agencies -- Crispin Porter & Bogusky, Bartle Bogle Hegarty, the Martin Agency and Y&R -- are squaring off for the business and are expected to present to the former vice president himself early next month, according to executives familiar with the review. The budget for the "historic, three-to-five-year, multimedia global campaign," as the request for proposals puts it, is contingent on how much money the alliance raises. Media spending will likely be more than $100 million a year.
$100 million. Hmmm. Isn't that what Gore is reported to have made selling this snake oil since he left politics? Yep, it's all about the money:
The Alliance's RFP [request for proposal] is, as you might expect, part inspirational -- quoting Gandhi, M. Scott Peck, Erik Erikson, and of course Mr. Gore -- and part detailed description of the task ahead for the winner. That will involve convincing people to making the climate issue, which already has high awareness, a more actionable priority.
Isn't that marvelous? So, now, like any company, Gore will be advertising his "product" on television, radio, and in print.
This scam gets better and better.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
To be honest, I'm torn on
August 26, 2007 - 23:17 ET by TheDeuceTo be honest, I'm torn on this one.
First, it's good to hear that 100 million is going into ads touting GW as 'actionable'. It's less direct dollars that will be available for Hillary or Obama.
But, by the same token, these will be little more than campaign ads for dems, so my guess is that McCain-Feingold won't stop them. And, since the media has dutifully painted the picture as A) GW is real and it's bad. and B) only dems can save us from it, these will be nothing less than demo campaign ads.
100 Million Dollar Campaign for Candidate Gore
August 26, 2007 - 23:38 ET by Lame CherryGore learned from the Clintons devious times 10. The stealth candidate is about to promote himself as high priest of the eco religion and saviour to the world.
Do NOT FORGET people this is the same outfit who came up with the "new covenant" a complete abomination against the pure Covenant of the Bible. It got swept away in a huge hurry in the media before it started a firestorm, but this ilk has been taking Chicom bribes and will do anything to skirt elections.........this is Al Gore's opening bid..........a 100 million dollar campaign not covered by the Federal Elections as the non candidate campaigns until the "day he answers the electors draft and submits to the people's will".
The link proves the Clinton "new covenant" abomination. If this would have been Muslims their would have been open rebellion in their religion.
www.clintonmemoriallibrary.com/clint_spirit.html
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
Agree. Gore also knows it
August 27, 2007 - 09:47 ET by nuttyAgree. Gore also knows it takes money to make money...he's in line to make more tons of dough from the sheep who buy into his religion.
Tonight I watched part of
August 27, 2007 - 00:37 ET by TETonight I watched part of the "Blue Planet" series on the Discovery channel, and the last five minutes were turned over to two or three "biologists" claiming that the end is near for the planet due to "global warming". One of the "biologists" sobbed that she was frightened that her granddaughter may not get to see polar bears in the Arctic because they would be extinct. Of course, the "biologists" offered no evidence of the existence of "global warming" and no evidence that humans are causing "global warming". Just the same, familiar, emotional cries.
Polar bear extinction?
August 27, 2007 - 02:10 ET by GalvanicOne of the "biologists" sobbed that she was frightened that her granddaughter may not get to see polar bears in the Arctic because they would be extinct.
The Great Polar Bear Extinction Scare again. Perhaps this so-called biologist ought to talk to Canada's official in charge of monitoring polar bears. He says that of Canada's 13 polar bear populations, 12 are stable or growing.
The polar bears that appear to be at risk are the computer-generated kind used by the AGWers to promote the myth.
polar Bears
August 27, 2007 - 06:41 ET by acadia1755A Little correction 12 are Growing and one is stable.
Liberals cannot stop giving away our values, the minutes they stops giving... they becomes conservatives.
Thnaks for bringing this to our attention
August 27, 2007 - 06:09 ET by TokyoTomDo you know anything about who is actually funding Gore? That would be really worth knowing. Enviro groups don`t have pockets that deep, and even they get much of their funding from corporations.
The ad agencies are of course fronts for corporate interests. Surely you haven`t forgotten the TCS was create by, and until recently was own by, an ad agency. I wonder who funded them?
As a further service to readers, here is a link to the Board members of Alliance for Climate Protection: http://www.climateprotect.org/board
It includes prominent America-haters like Theodore Roosevelt IV, Managing Director at Lehman Brothers, Brent Scowcroft, retired Republican Congressman Sherwood L. Boehlert, and Lee Thomas, former President and COO of Georgia-Pacific Corp. and head of the EPA under Ronald Reagan, and its partners include Bill Gates` Microsoft.
Why are so many people with so much money trying to kill the goose that laid the golden egg?
TT
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool."
Richard Feynman
They're selling this much
August 27, 2007 - 08:37 ET by danboThey're selling this much like they're selling soap or used cars. Time for a swift boat ad? Can you imaguine an ad going from scientist to scientist who says this is BS, giving their name and credentials. A few swift boat ads did more than the millions poured in by the democrats.
Fortunately with all the selling by the left. The majority of people still know it's BS.
And they complain about. Is it 60 million coming from "BIG OIL"?
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
}}---> AGW Swiftboating
August 27, 2007 - 08:48 ET by Cool ArrowOn the front burner is the "good stuff". Stuff we "all" agree on. We got evil oil companies, we got polluters who need to clean up their acts, We got Cleaner cars.
On the back burner at a simmer we got "Ask what you can do for Mother Gaia"? That's the part people are not educated on. Sure, costs will go up when all those corporations get lassoed, but unspoken yet is the tax increase on all Americans to fill the coffers of useless feeeelgood Carbon absolution indulgences. Most of America doesn't see the connection yet between what is being done by the Liberal Rich to lead the sheeple to the Carbon Church.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
But WHO are "They" that are paying for the sales job? n/t
August 27, 2007 - 12:55 ET by TokyoTom"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool."
Richard Feynman
The they is a large group.
August 27, 2007 - 15:29 ET by danboThe they is a large group. Including groups as the sierra club, alternative energy groups who want the governement to pick up the tab. And government groups who have a job that depends on a continuation of the AGW myth.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Yes, these people are interested, but they don't have the money
August 27, 2007 - 23:53 ET by TokyoTomto fund $100 million per year. Only corporations or extremely wealthy individuals do. Does any of them want to destroy the world economy?
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool."
Richard Feynman
They want to get money. Or
August 28, 2007 - 01:08 ET by danboThey want to get money. Or power. Or both. Using your logic the left needs to appologize to Exxon.
You also forgot governments, and government supported agencies. They have a lot of money. they can just take it from businesses they don't like, and from it's citizens to pay for what it likes.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Come on, focus on what I'm asking
August 28, 2007 - 01:46 ET by TokyoTomYes, government wants to be bigger, and I can understand that the other "theys" want to get money. Or power. Or both!
But the question is who is going to be shelling out $100 million per year for AGW ads (if this report is actually correct).
Are you saying that our own government is finding this campaign?
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool."
Richard Feynman
In Europe it's often the
August 28, 2007 - 09:54 ET by danboIn Europe it's often the government running the ads. They use other peoples money. (The tax payer.)
In this country there are far fewer. Some paid for by groups as alternative energy lobby groups (I keep running into one specific company's name; though there are many more.) They're groups that want cheaper sources of energy eliminated or curbed, and government hand outs. (Michael Eckhart of the American Council of Renewable Energy is a great example.) Likewise people who expect to make lots of money in carbon trading are part of it.
A hundred million is not a lot of money here. Considering the amout of money to be made.
Considering about a 100 million people have died because of the ban on DDT, and 14 billion (with a B) have contracted malaria; 100 million dollars is quite cheap.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
Let's follow the money. Again, who are the "they" paying here?
August 28, 2007 - 23:24 ET by TokyoTomYes, "A hundred million is not a lot of money here. Considering the amout of money to be made." That's exactly MY point. So you think that the people behind this are not enviros or socialists, but corporations trying to get a leg up on competitors?
If so, where is the criticism of those corporations?
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool."
But groups as Greenpeace
August 29, 2007 - 11:45 ET by danboBut groups as Greenpeace anfd the Sierra club also have a pretty tidy sum.Everytime they go on the air or make an issue of something they get more donation. Hollywood alone probably gives more to those organizations than Exxon gives sceince skeptics.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT
A CHALLENGE
August 27, 2007 - 09:50 ET by CrashWhat's the carbon foot print generated by his Inconvenient Spoof?
How many tons of carbon will one hundred million dollars buy?
Question......Will Hillary pick Al Gore as VP again ? ? I
August 27, 2007 - 11:21 ET by JayTeeGore is hanging around the office.....is he hoping for VP again..?
He may bring some votes in to the Dems (minus Tenn.).....If the Anti-war crowd is pissed at Hillary/Dems, will they still vote Green ?
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
The Addams Family Returns
August 27, 2007 - 11:31 ET by PawpawNGeez, be like the Addams Family returning, although Lucretta(spelling) was much better looking than Hill & Lurch, well!!!