Heartland's Billboards and Joe Romm's stunning hypocrisy

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 04, 2012

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:

Heartland Institute launches campaign linking terrorism, murder, and global warming belief – Capital Weather Gang – The Washington Post

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.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/05/04/477921/heartland-institute-compares-climate-science-believers-and-reporters-to-mass-murderers-and-madmen/

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, 2012

May 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:

Is this a good time to remind everyone of when Watts was posting the UK neonazi party, the BNPs, opinions on climate change?

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.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
572 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 4, 2012 2:22 pm

Dish it out. It’s a brutal world out there. When Sherman burned Atlanta to the ground, (after giving a couple days notice to the residents to VACATE…which they did!) he was roundly critisized. If I recall right his reply was, “War is HELL and I don’t intend to make it any better than that.”
Welcome to Hades Joel R.
Max

DirkH
May 4, 2012 2:27 pm

Eli Rabett says:
May 4, 2012 at 1:01 pm
“BTW what fraction of a Godwin is Ted Kaczynski?”
A millionth.

Follow the Money
May 4, 2012 2:28 pm

“Just because the “new deniers” (warmist) sling mud from the gutter; it’s better to step away from the gutter than to jump into also.”
They’re getting nastier because they are self-correcting their positions. They are trying to create a discussion milieu wherein it is accepted that they have always held the position that additional CO2 has some effect, no matter how small. The enemy “other” are not those who challenge “catastrophic” AGW as propelled by the UN and governments and gravy train science, but those who challenge the idea climate changes at all. Being lefties generally, they are susceptible to pseud0-scientific sounding argumentation. And being arrogant, they can never admit their own intellects were used against them. Heyhoe herself has said even one degree of warming is dangerous. Do you think she would of said that a few years ago, before public discussion of “climate feedbacks” brought that pseduo-science to closer inspection?
If you want to rattle their cages, you need to get them to say on the record how much warming will come, and if 1 degree of warming with CO2 doubling is dangerous and why. They are the Borg, you need to evolve against their evolving weapons systems. On our more reasonable side, we unfortunately have vocal rightists who believe this is a war on “capitalism,” which is true for only about 1% of the warmistas (prob. less). Can you imagine if Heartland ran a campaign showing how Enron, GE, Goldman, etc. etc. instigated and propeled this faux crisis? I can’t.

MrX
May 4, 2012 2:28 pm

I thought it was a hoax. It has to be. Skeptics have been on the receiving end of being demonized and this has always hurt the AGW cause. To start dishing it out, especially this way, is really ugly. Not only that, but they’re using a logical fallacy. Bombing is wrong. But that doesn’t mean everything else they believe in is automatically wrong. If those things are wrong, it should be because of facts, not because one of their other activities is criminal.

Dave L.
May 4, 2012 2:30 pm

Great attention getter in my opinion. Very effective too. I’ll wager the images and the association will linger in the subconscious of many individuals. Goody two-shoes ads put people to sleep; they are worthless. If the ads lead people to the Heartland Website, mission accomplished.

pokerguy
May 4, 2012 2:31 pm

The sad thing is H.I. was riding so high with that pathetic assist from Gleick. Man, they look bad. Heads should roll. The most painful thing is that we’ve given the other side so much ammo, which is something they’ve not had in a long while. I’m sick.

Heggs
May 4, 2012 2:34 pm


I would rather they ‘dished it out’ with cold hard facts than with UTTER TRIPE like that billboard.

bwanamakubwa
May 4, 2012 2:35 pm

A dignified reticence to comment whilst the Law takes its course would have been the appropriate action, IMHO

M Courtney
May 4, 2012 2:35 pm

The problem is it relies on guilt by association, not malice or just error.
It’s a dirty trick and should be condemned.
I guess this is Glieck’s victory. He portrayed HI as rightwing nutters, they lost all other funding and so now live up (or down) to expectations.
They have to get what funds are available to them.

Myrrh
May 4, 2012 2:35 pm

Meanwhile, our middling industries are being destroyed, our lives are being micro-managed, our freedoms are being whittled away – by the policies of marxists, both communist and fascist masquerading as the caring environmentalists – and so much more besides. Write the follow up ad campaign to stop people in their tracks without bringing in politics..

Sean Peake
May 4, 2012 2:37 pm

Mr Bast, make the call.

May 4, 2012 2:38 pm

I am glad I find myself in the minority again. To the extent that I offended moderators’ sensitivities (which are happily asleep when “ideologically acceptable” views are expressed using much stronger language here).
Heartland’s billboards are true, there is no discernible difference between environmental fanaticism, terrorism, and totalitarianism. “Huge misstep”? Only if you think that marching in step with the renegade “consensus” is a good thing.
I, for one, refuse to say “Baa!”

Brian
May 4, 2012 2:39 pm

“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.”
Considering we have Climate advocators talking about burning skeptics houses down I wouldn’t say the link to terrorism is all that far fetched. As much hate as I’ve had pushed my way I have to say I don’t have pity for the believers.

May 4, 2012 2:40 pm

Does the Heartland Institute not engage the professional services of a competent Advertising & PR Agency? Where were they in this?
What was the internal process for this at Heartland? If any agencies were involved, they need to be fired! And big FYI: the vast majority of agency creatives are left-of-center, they don’t mind sabotaging/sacrificing/resigning a client they don’t like and/or who make bad decisions.. like this whopper!
Peter Gleick, et al, must be counting his lucky stars!

AndyG55 (from down-under)
May 4, 2012 2:41 pm

Just a picture of Al Gore would have been as effective. with him jetting between mansions.
They should replace it with one thats says.
“Ok, now that was a bit over the top, but that is how those skeptical of global warming have been linked.” How do you think they feel. !!

Atomic Hairdryer
May 4, 2012 2:42 pm

Which is more dangerous, the Unabomber, or a scientist with political and media clout who’s expressed a belief that the Earth’s optimum population should be <2bn?

Kaboom
May 4, 2012 2:45 pm

Bad choice, stepping down to the level of Joe Romm.

Ted Clayton
May 4, 2012 2:49 pm

Mr. Watts & WUWT Co;
I’ve mentioned this before, and it becomes ever-more the truth.
Climate-alarmism weakens its case, reduces it stature, and loses public standing, with its characteristic over-reliance on sarcasm, smirk, ridicule, and what I will generalise as ‘punk-mouth’.
This is a form of rhetorical delinquency & vandalism – and is readily recognized as such. When this tactic is employed by Heartland; to the extent that it is allowed to become SOP at WUWT, we have chosen to let our own behaviour “reflect” the lowest & weakest of our adversary. We thus mould ourselves in their least-effective image.
A clear opportunity exists for WUWT to further-elevate its leading place in the public forum, and to further-enhance the admirable works it is able to perform, by eschewing the ‘clever-tongue’ indulgence. We are not here to show what creative smart-asses we are capable of being.
This is not just a Heartland problem. Let their error be an object-lesson, Mr. Watts & All, pointing to the hazard of this slippery-slope … and the height of the credibility-precipice at its base.
Your ally & fellow sceptic,
Ted Clayton
[REPLY: Welcome back, Mr. Clayton. You did, of course, read the whole thread? Anthony has quite clearly indicated that this is not in any way countenanced by WUWT, let alone an SOP. You’ll forgive a reference to theater? “… the angels have chose, to fight their battles below…” -REP]

Ron
May 4, 2012 2:52 pm

I’m beginning to connect the dots….dots….dots….dots….

shrnfr
May 4, 2012 2:52 pm

Dumb. Very simply dumb. A waste of money and probably goodwill.

Mr.D.Imwit
May 4, 2012 2:57 pm

I see a lot of readers here letting off steam about Heartlands,see how the the Brits are doing it this weekendhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2139591/Full-steam-ahead-Golden-age-rail-travel-brought-life-Flying-Scotsman-service-charges-Yorkshire-Moors.html

JPeden
May 4, 2012 2:59 pm

Interesting tactic – turnaround’s fair play and then some? Watch the “mainstream” Climate scientists, enc., squirm when the criticism first directed against Heartland is rather quickly found to apply more to the “mainstream” Climate Scientists themselves and then hopefully to their own Post Normal AGW “science”.
But it’s definitely a high stakes gamble! So naturally I voted for the tactic.

May 4, 2012 3:02 pm

Bad taste is bad taste. HI needs to acknowledge this major PR error and move on. McKitrick’s letter at CA says it all very well. The battle is best fought with good science, not nasty, cheap shots.

Henry chance
May 4, 2012 3:05 pm

Brilliant billboard. It was run as an actual experiment to see what kind of reaction would come from role reversals.
Role reversals are methods that sometimes apply when asking ethics questions.

Aunty Freeze
May 4, 2012 3:09 pm

What on earth were Heartland thinking? Advertisements like that will only put people off, not make people think. You gain respect from sticking to the moral high ground not advertising pictures of nutjobs to say if you believe in agw then you must be like him.
It should be about science, not political leanings, religion etc. Both sides are guilty of this and it really gets my goat. I’m a skeptic because of the science I have read. I’m not right wing, religious, in pay of big oil or a nature hater. My politics are left leaning, I don’t believe in any god, I create wildlife habitats and enjoy wildlife photography and no oil company is paying me a thing! Stick to the science, all the politics and religious stuff really puts me off.

1 5 6 7 8 9 23