Green Investors Pay the Media to Promote ‘Climate Change’

Green Investors Pay the Media to Promote ‘Climate Change’. By Daniel Greenfield.

The Associated Press revealed last year that it had scored $8 million to promote claims of global warming. The AP impartially described this massive conflict of interest as an illustration of “how philanthropy has swiftly become an important new funding source for journalism”.

“This far-reaching initiative will transform how we cover the climate story,” its executive editor claimed. That is no doubt true. And an incredibly damaging admission.

The philanthropic quid-pro-quo saw five organizations fund the AP’s dedicated team of “more than two dozen journalists” to cover “climate issues” that the wire service would then plant in papers around the country to terrify Americans into supporting ‘green’ taxes and subsidies. …

Who pays the media for climate panic stories? Those who profit from it, of course. The article mentions James Murdoch and his wife, the Climate Leadership Council, major banks (JP Morgan, Santander and Goldman Sachs), energy companies (BP, Shell and Conoco), BlackRock’s $250 million climate fund, the Rockefeller Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation, the Climate Finance Fund, Tesla (whose business model depends on a government subsidized climate panic), and a fistful of the green energy companies they own.

Those investments seem likely to do better if Mr. and Mrs. America, or at least the CEOs and financiers who take the media seriously, keep reading about the threat of “climate change”.

The AP is taking money from organizations heavily leveraged in green investments to promote the need for green investments. And it fails to disclose the financial interests that its funders have in promoting global warming hysteria. …

That is what ESG looks like underneath the Gen Z activists being paid to scream in the streets even as the AP is being paid to scream more respectably in stories planted in local papers.

Serious journalism would ask questions or at least mention some of this [i.e who is paying for the reporting] in passing. The AP instead acts as a mouthpiece without even enough lingering self-respect to disclose any of that. …

Since the AP is not about to report that there are more polar bears than at any time since the 1960s or that climate doomers keep changing the date when everyone will die every few years, the content is predictable. The AP would like to benefit from repeat business from these massive foundations, so it’s going to produce the kinds of stories that will bring more money flowing its way. …

Aggressive hypocrisy:

In recent years, Democrats and the media have targeted conservative groups like the Heartland Institute claiming that they act as “fronts” for oil companies. The AP promoted documents stolen from the Heartland Institute about its funders and has spent years running hit pieces on Heartland without revealing that the wire service is a paid shill for green special interests. …

The ability of special interests to capture the media at the source by targeting wire services like the AP shows how what we read about the environment is being manipulated by networks of special interests with billions at stake.

The next time you see an AP story about “climate change”, you know who’s paying for it.

hat-tip Rafe