UPDATE5: 5/5/10:30AM Donna Laframboise pulls out of the conference.
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2012/05/05/why-i-wont-be-speaking-at-the-heartland-conference/
Instead, those of us who had accepted Heartland’s invitation to take part in its conference found ourselves blindsided – a mere two weeks before the conference is set to begin – by a torrent of negative press. Suddenly, we were all publicly linked to an organization that thinks it’s OK to equate people concerned about climate change with psychopaths.
Blindsided is right. AFAIK, not one attendee was given the courtesy of weighing in on the billboard campaign beforehand, and if I had been given that courtesy my answer would have been a resounding NO. Instead, I believe we all got the notice after the fact.
UPDATE4: 7PM PST Heartland issues a press release ending the billboard
May 4, 2012 – The Heartland Institute has pulled its global warming billboard starring Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber whose manifesto expressed his belief in catastrophic man-caused global warming. The digital billboard ran for exactly 24 hours along the Eisenhower Expressway near Chicago in the suburb of Maywood, Illinois.
The following statement by Heartland Institute President Joseph Bast may be used for attribution. For more information, please contact Director of Communications Jim Lakely at jlakely@heartland.org or 312-377-4000.
“This provocative billboard was always intended to be an experiment. And after just 24 hours the results are in: It got people’s attention.
“This billboard was deliberately provocative, an attempt to turn the tables on the climate alarmists by using their own tactics but with the opposite message. We found it interesting that the ad seemed to evoke reactions more passionate than when leading alarmists compare climate realists to Nazis or declare they are imposing on our children a mass death sentence. We leave it to others to determine why that is so.
“The Heartland Institute doesn’t often do ‘provocative’ communication. In fact, we’ve spent 15 years presenting the economic and scientific arguments that counter global warming alarmism. No one has worked harder, or better, on that task than Heartland. We will continue to do that – especially at our next International Conference on Climate Change in Chicago from May 21 – 23.
“Heartland has spent millions of dollars contributing to the real debate over climate change, and $200 for a one-day digital billboard. In return, we’ve been subjected to the most uncivil name-calling and disparagement you can possibly imagine from climate alarmists. The other side of the climate debate seems to be playing by different rules. This experiment produced further proof of that.
“We know that our billboard angered and disappointed many of Heartland’s friends and supporters, but we hope they understand what we were trying to do with this experiment. We do not apologize for running the ad, and we will continue to experiment with ways to communicate the ‘realist’ message on the climate.”
========================================================
UPDATE3: 3:15PM PST I saw this private letter to Joe Bast earlier from Ross McKitrick, and I agreed with Ross in a reply. He has posted it on Climate Audit so I’ll share an excerpt here:
He wrote: “This kind of fallacious, juvenile and inflammatory rhetoric does nothing to enhance your reputation…”
“…hands your opponents a huge stick to beat you with, and sullies the reputation of the speakers you had recruited. Any public sympathy you had built up as a result of the Gleick fiasco will be lost–and more besides–as a result of such a campaign. I urge you to withdraw it at once.”.
UPDATE2: 1PM PST
From Joe Bast via email:
We will stop running it at 4:00 p.m. CST today. (It’s a digital billboard, so a simple phone call is all it takes.)
UPDATE: I’ve added a simple poll at the bottom to gauge opinion on this issue. – Anthony
There’s a disturbance in the farce. Tom Nelson captures these:
Do you believe global warming is real, poses risks to the environment, and needs to be addressed? The Heartland Institute, a think-tank based in Chicago which has promoted climate skepticism, wants you to know you’re in some sinister company.
Twitter / @eilperin: In new ads, the Heartland …
In new ads, the Heartland Institute suggests only terrorists believe in the link b/w human activity and global warming: wapo.st/IOUuEI
Predictably, ThinkProgress/Climate Progress is all bent out of shape.
But Joe Romm and Brad Johnson (who now also runs “Forecast the Facts” to hassle TV weatherpeople) think nothing of making a similar comparison about “deniers”.
Speaking of “mass murderers and madmen”….
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/07/25/277564/norway-terrorist-is-a-global-warming-denier/
Romm of course will be unable to embrace his own hypocrisy, because he’s reportedly paid a six figure sum by the Center for American Progress to write the hateful detritus he produces daily.
That said, I’ll be blunt; I think Heartland’s billboard campaign is a huge misstep, and does nothing but piss people off and divide the debate further. IMHO it isn’t going to win any converts, and had they asked me I would have told them that it is a bad idea that will backfire on them.
Here’s what they have issued in a press release about it:
May 03, 2012May 3, 2012 – Billboards in Chicago paid for by The Heartland Institute point out that some of the world’s most notorious criminals say they “still believe in global warming” – and ask viewers if they do, too.
Heartland’s first digital billboard – along the inbound Eisenhower Expressway (I-290) in Maywood – is the latest effort by the free-market think tank to inform the public about what it views as the collapsing scientific, political, and public support for the theory of man-made global warming. It is also reminding viewers of the questionable ethics of global warming’s most prominent proponents.
“The most prominent advocates of global warming aren’t scientists,” said Heartland’s president, Joseph Bast. “They are Charles Manson, a mass murderer; Fidel Castro, a tyrant; and Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber. Global warming alarmists include Osama bin Laden and James J. Lee (who took hostages inside the headquarters of the Discovery Channel in 2010).
Bast added, “The leaders of the global warming movement have one thing in common: They are willing to use force and fraud to advance their fringe theory.” For more about the billboards and why Heartland says people should not still believe in global warming, click here.
Ugh. Ugly.
There’s more than enough climate ugliness to go around. Though, it seems harder and harder to find this ultimate warmist embarrassment.
Anybody that can help with Donna’s suggestion?
And there’s many more examples of climate ugliness from the left that we’ve seen.
On another note, the serially mendacious commenter known as “Dorlomin” left this comment over at the Romm shop:
dorlomin says:
I thought I should clear this up. First, “dorlomin” of course is all about smear, that’s his MO, and the MO of the many anonymous cowards who purvey such things without having any integrity or courage themselves.
Second, the simple fact is that I didn’t know about the association of the person making the claim that “Climate skepticism could soon be a criminal offence in UK
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/19/climate-skepticism-could-soon-be-a-criminal-offence-in-uk/
Third, when I learned who was behind the story, I immediately took it down because it was an inappropriate source, just like I don’t post videos from LaRouche and other fringe organizations.
Of course “dorlomin” and left foot forward would have you believe that I consort with these folks and have them over for drinks and dinner, rather than the fact that once I learned more, I found them offensive and immediately deleted the story. It was my mistake for not checking sources further.
“dorlomin” is of course playing the very hate game he rants about, and is hypocritically blind just like Romm. The only difference is that one is paid to produce propoganda and the other is a coward.
But will Climate Progress delete their offensive story about climate deniers and terrorists? Not likely, it would hurt their sales figures image.
POLL:
Note: multiple anti vote stuffing features are enabled in this poll. I’ve made the questions simple so that editorial bias in the questions is minimal.
Benjamin D Hillicoss says:
May 4, 2012 at 12:12 pm
“damn heartland for telling the truth…the only difference between al gore and ted K is a few bombs”
Moby.
I thought we’d passed the stage of giving credence to a proposition based on who believes or disbelieves that proposition a long time ago. Its a fallacy and a propaganda coup all rolled into one.
Jay P says:
May 4, 2012 at 11:49 am
“It’s the true face of Climate Skepticism folks. You make make your bed, you gotta sleep in it.”
Idiot.
A very bad move on heartland’s part. WE had the moral high ground because we had pretty much reframed from the mud slinging allowing the other side to do it instead.
Heartland should have followed Anthony’s lead of politeness and civility. (Anthony is much more patient in that regard than I)
How can Romm’s hypocrisy be stunning when it’s actually totally expected? I’d be stunned if he hadn’t compared skeptics to terrorists.
Just let the facts speak for themselves and leave the fear mongering to the alarmists. Why play their game? They’re LOSING.
Some reasoned comment from Brendan O’Neill…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brendanoneill2/100156243/environmentalists-compared-their-opponents-to-mass-murderers-long-before-the-heartland-institute/
“Okay, yes, it is not the most sophisticated advertising campaign in world history. But I don’t remember greens getting their panties in a bunch on the 700,000 previous occasions (that’s a rough estimate) when non-belief in global warming was likened to being a terrorist, a Nazi, or Beelzebub. Indeed, greens – including some of those who choked on their muesli this morning when they heard about Heartland’s advert antics – are world experts in comparing their critics to Hitler and other assorted nutjobs.”
A good point; the choir here (and mind you, there is nothing wrong or bad about choirs!) is only one ‘theater’ where events and media ‘happens’; then there is the larger ‘theater’ of Joe Six pack out there on the Dan Ryan Expressway in/around Chicago …
Mark me down as “No opinion” btw on this issue but I do see from where the concerns ‘spring’ or originate.
Meanwhile this will get/fetch far more press at low to no cost than HI could muster otherwise.
I might still like it explained by someone why it is egregious to point out the influence the CAGW crowd has had on some of our more notorious criminals (like Ted K.), too. At this point I don’t know how much ‘motive’ AGW was for some of these characters, but didn’t Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, have a copy of Algore’s book (Earth in the Balance) in his possession, or was it the parallel writing style the two had as when Algore’s book and Ted’s manifesto were compared?
Ted;s 35,000-word essay was titled: “Industrial Society and Its Future”. The FBI simply called it the “Unabomber Manifesto”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski#Manifesto
.
Patently an ad campaign not aimed at WUWT readers, but WUWT readers don’t need persuading.
This is aimed at Homer Simpson.
The question is… Are there more Homer Simpsons than WUWT readers?
You mention that “…multiple anti vote stuffing features are enabled in this poll.” Don’t you realize that I’m from Chicago and voting “early and often” is our right? All kidding aside, I think this is a big blunder on the part of Heartland. For one thing it could make the nonsense that spewed out of Gleick’s mouth believable. If the Heartland’s ad didn’t backfire and proved to be successful PR it would still be a bad think. Finally, I had the misfortune a few years back, to have had a boss who said I looked like the Unabomber and took to calling me Ted Kaczynski in the office. And I’m a skeptic for chrissake!
Light-heartedness is the key to effectiveness. Josh’s cartoons would have been better.
HI not only came up with a bad idea, it apparently didn’t “check it out” with sympathetic outsiders or a focus group first, which is just as bad a mistake (arrogant, headstrong).
How about posting charts of flat-lined temperatures, etc. over the caption, “The Warm Is Turning”?
Or a montage of dead windmills over a headline, “There are *** of these dead whirligigs in the US now, but still we’re building more–Why? (And why haven’t you been told this?)”
Or a photo of the pollution around a solar plant in China over the caption, “Clean? Green?”
It’s so simple.
“This is incredible; they were winning by being squeaky clean and above the alarmist fray. Someone with clout tell them to remove it immediately with a big hands up and an admission that it was thoroughly ill conceived.”
Too late. Damage done. it’s now akin to Glieke’s “Serious lapse of professional judgement…”
this kind of thing is like getting pregnant. it’s something that can’t be done half-way. they are now in and have to face the consequences and the loss of the Ace in the hole.
Too bad.
Unfortunately Jay Lehr has a bit of a history of going off the handle at times and doing things which just don’t make sense.
We have read in the main post about what some say who are critical of the Heartland billboards.
Here is part of the other side of the story from Heartland’s website which has a whole section about its billboards. Here is a small portion of what they say:
They are not pulling any punches nor apologizing. Let the discussion go on. It is time for a discussion of who supports alarmism and why.
John
If someone is throwing punches, should you just stand there? These guys are fighting REALLY dirty. The vast majority of the world couldn’t really give a fiddler’s fork about “global climate warming change catastrophe”. Should wake some people up anyway, …..
The poll needs a “Yes, Thank G*d” option.
I get what Heartland was after but they blew the execution of the campaign. They are tired of being painted as the ‘fringe’ when they (we) are not but trying to link CAGW belief to these madmen is a stretch too far and is unnecessarily offensive to boot.
I do agree that “winning on the science” isn’t going to work with a certain segment of the population. So, it’s good to try something else but not this. I would suggest going for humor/irony instead. It would be interesting to undertake a serious campaign about the evidence and catastrophic risks of the likely-to-continue natural global cooling. Think about the impact of such a campaign:
– It clearly shows that global warming is likely bogus (can’t cool and warm at once).
– Any attempts to refute the data (models aren’t accurate, temp measurements are approximate, etc) also undermine CAGW arguments.
– Mainstream media in search of a catastrophe story would snap it up.
– There is mounds of inarguable evidence, both current and historic.
– Global cooling can only be due to natural causes, so no policy proscriptions apply (however, it does highlight the real need for cost-effective, reliable 24/7 energy sources).
– Lots of fun creating valid cooling analogs for all the warming tropes: instead of greenhouse we have the icehouse house effect, instead of climate change we have the risk of our climate going ‘dormant’ (it would be disastrous if the climate stopped changing), theoretical cooling feedbacks might lead to ‘runaway cooling’, etc.
– Any discussion of the potential risks of CNGC (Catastrophic Natural Global Cooling), also makes a case for the benefits of warming.
If Heartland wants to ‘go negative’ with a counter-campaign to CAGW, this would be far more effective.
I agree with most posters here that this is probably a big mistake, but the world of PR sometimes delivers some surprises. Speculation above that this was done to ensure coverage by the media of up coming events might make it worth while. Keep in mind the public relations axiom there is no such thing as bad publicity (assuming you can spin things properly after the story breaks).
There are several ways I can imagine that this could turn out to be a positive move in the long run. The folks most offended here are the folks that would not have their minds changed by any means. It could however be a gateway to discussion in the open media of how often the AGW crowd have openly called for totalitarian moves against skeptics. The media has largely ignored the implicit threat in those comments but sometimes a strategy to make discussion of an undesirable topic is to make it look reasonable compared to some far more extreme comment.
Only time will tell, and I think it is either a very bad mistake or a very risky move that “could” somehow in the long run be net beneficial. For example if Heartland has some shocking discovery to announce showing malicious intent by the primary advocates of AGW that this campaign would open the door to expose.
Heartland I think you blew it, but hope you know what you are doing!
Larry
Simply put – 2 wrongs do not make a right (but 3 lefts do).
Ted Kaczynski probably believes that the sky is blue and that grass is green. Should I stop believing the same things just because Ted does?
Mr Bast needs to learn which side of the claymore mine is the “front” before setting it off. This belongs in the “I’m too dumb to be running an institute” bucket and the only sufficient apology is a resignation letter.
Grossly overstating your case is a strategic error. Reasonable people will stop believing you and your opponents will gain ammunition.
How many times has Al Gore’s ill-considered contention that “the debate is over” been used against him? It’s practically a hashtag of the skeptical community.
John Whitman,
I guess we’re not part of the consensus. I saw nothing dishonest about the billboard. But then, I always wear my heart on my sleeve.
I would have preferred to see a billboard with a picture of a reputable scientist or astronaut, with a good money quote.
Hmmm, their ad is accurate but “ill-conceived, badly timed, stupid, shooting their feet, jumping the shark”!?!?! I guess we can forget using Hitler or Pol Pot in the next one huh?
Whole lotta groupthink and politically correct nonsense going on here. This is how we got here in the first place. This is why billions of dollars have already been wasted. This is why your children are being brainwashed behind your back as we speak. This is how eco-Zealots have thoroughly infiltrated government agencies and NGO’s. This is why the lesser of two evils, the (R) party is called the stupid party.
The way to defeat the enemy is to make THEIR position politically incorrect, not by friendly fire from a politically correct bandwagon. I stand with agree with these commenters and the 25 others that voted NO to the poll question …
Even after everything that has happened from dodging FOIA requests and in-your-face personal attacks, lots of folks seem to still actually believe that this is a nice academic argument about Science, to be won on some intellectual level in a tempered venue. Sorry, this is not really about Science, not the big picture. Science is just the means to an end in this situation. The red-green radical Socialist left is coming after you on many battlefields, not just Science.
This was a devastatingly stupid misstep. Nearly 80% say it’s a blunder. And this is a skeptic website. The billboards should come down today. Don’t wait until tomorrow.
Issue a heart(land) felt apology. Quickly.
richardscourtney says:
May 4, 2012 at 12:23 pm
hold your nose & read their manifesto – then come back and say they are not left wing
Sorry I think something is really really wrong about this story