Roger Caiazza
Irina Slav on energy Substack is described as “All things energy. Challenging the dominant narrative because facts matter”. Her latest article “Burn, Hollywood, burn” calls out the blatant indoctrination and propaganda associated with Hollywood today. As always when you dig deeper it is all about money for the shills.
In her introduction, Slav expressed a concern that is common to many of us here:
A couple of days ago, in a conversation with David Blackmon on X, I unthinkingly commented that we’ve reached peak idiocy in the transition narrative. David wisely reminded me that we keep getting proven wrong in this by the narrative constantly discovering new peaks to strive for and conquer. Alas, I couldn’t disagree.
In my work here I’ve mostly focused on calling out the climate indoctrinators in the media, in politics, and, occasionally, in schools. But there is an indoctrination channel I have so far steered clear of, for reasons of mental self-preservation. I get angry about things, you see, and I don’t really like being angry. When I saw this article on Rolling Stone a while ago, however, I got too angry to bother about disliking being angry.
The article is a symphony of climate propaganda done absolutely openly and eagerly, with an unshakeable conviction that amplifying climate catastrophism is the right thing to do. Through all means necessary.
She explains how this article is evidence of the incessant indoctrination of the masses regarding climate change. Earlier the emphasis was on social justice but now there is a shift:
That was the social justice stage of the indoctrination drive. Now, we seem to have reached the next stage, which is all about climate change, a distillate of social justice issues, if you will, since every single problem we have today can be traced back to climate change by the eager narrative pushers. Why so eager, you might ask? Well, because there’s money and fame in it.
The most revealing part of her article for me was her description of the organization called Good Energy. She describes it thusly:
Said organisation exists with the sole purpose of making climate change a central topic in movies and TV shows. Because it’s important, of course. The most important topic ever. And these gracious people are there to guide film folk on the journey to internalising this so they can make more climate change-centric movies and TV shows.
Here’s an excerpt: “We aim to make it as easy as possible to weave climate into any aspect of a story. Applying the Climate Lens™ to your narrative can reveal complexities in character and setting, add conflict, and unlock touching, funny, and surprising storylines — all of them backed by climate science, psychology, and lived experiences.”
Incidentally, while helping writers, directors and producers “weave climate into any aspect of a story” and why not every single aspect of a story, they’d make some money from this because these consulting services are not free. Indoctrination is a mission but that doesn’t mean it can’t be a business at the same time, and how cool is that!
The Good Energy “Library of Experts” is interesting for a couple of reasons: the wide range of expertise disciplines that claim a link to their work and climate change and the number of individuals who loyal readers here might recognize like Dr. Peter Kalmus. Slav goes on to expose a potential driver for their concern about climate change:
Speaking of money, the Daily Sceptic has done a great job in exposing the financial backing of Good Energy and similar organisations or shall I say formations because it certainly sounds more appropriate. You won’t be surprised to learn that this backing comes from climate obsessed billionaires. Bloomberg Philanthropies and the Sierra Club pop out among the list of backers, along with the Walton Family Foundation and One Earth.
She takes an optimistic view of this:
Sad as all this may be there is a silver lining and that silver lining lies in the fact that propaganda has never, ever produced quality art of any form or quality entertainment. Good art and good entertainment tell stories, invoke various emotions, and, if done really well, result in some form of catharsis.
Climate propaganda does not tell stories. It only aims to invoke one emotion and that’s fear. It hammers in a message disguised as a story that is so solid and unwieldy it defies interpretation. You can only swallow it whole. Or ridicule it, of course, because it is ridiculous.
Since climate propaganda in film – and in literature, too – is so rigid, it’s doomed to failure, just like the identity politics trend in literature. The reason for this is that while there may be many people with a mental age of four when it comes to discriminating between art and propaganda, there are many more who instinctively sense the difference and sooner or later shun the latter.
I hope she is correct. I tend to be a bit more pessimistic because I think that the inevitable reality slap of the insane transition policies may occur after irreparable harm. I encourage you to read all of her article and consider subscribing to her Substack.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
Roger Caiazza blogs on New York energy and environmental issues at Pragmatic Environmentalist of New York. More details on the Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act are available here and an inventory of over 370 articles about the Climate Act is also available. This represents his opinion and not the opinion of any of his previous employers or any other company with which he has been associated.
The IEEE Spectrum magazine is 1000% committed to pushing green propaganda and indoctrination as much as possible.
I don’t disagree with the comment, but why are you mentioning Spectrum? IEEE is my professional org, so Spectrum is a default mag. They do sometimes write good articles. The nonsense with the Mars Climate Orbiter loss comes to mind. Of course, that was years ago.
They repeat the 1.5C political noise multiple times in each issue, as justification for whichever “low carbon” gizmo they are promoting. Never any questioning about the impossibility of going 100% electric.
I see it everywhere. New Pioneer, Hobby Farms, Fine Homebuilding, etc. Almost impossible to get away from it.
While there is a market for fear p@rn, it still needs good storytelling. Even Born Again “Rapture” literature overstayed the patience of its audience.
I really doubt AlGore would find any audience if he made a remake of “An Inconvenient Truth”.
Why not? He could call it ‘A Convenient Untruth’.
Ah, “Climate Change” mentioned in upcoming movies – a new metric for which movies to avoid. I love it when Pink-O Commies reveal themselves.
I have only one question, who are they trying to reach? It is obvious, the common guy. That is precisely where we need to concentrate our efforts. Once the common guy understands how badly he is being screwed and how much worse the CAGW mongrels want to make it all of this nonsense will end. We don’t have to reach everyone but if we can educate a fair minority we will win decisively. Time to start.
‘Social Justice’ is, I think, what we used to call ‘mob rule’. If so then these agitators and propagandists had better be afraid of stirring things up too much – they might get a taste of ‘Social Justice’ they’ll find hard to swallow.
I tend to limit my Hollywood viewing. On occasion, I have seen pictures of female stars, at award nights, that are competing for slut of the Year awards.
Are you doing a scientific study?
Global warming leads to skimpier female clothing.
Get a government grant
The female stars are a Hollywood product and the skimpy or see-through outfits constitute free advertising…
I agree wholeheartedly with Irina Slav. I commented on a recent article here on the Bloomberg ‘Handbook’ for Hollywood writers, noting that movies coming out of tinsel town for the last dozen years with mandatory non sequiturish blotches of QWERTY gender fluff and climate porn not serving the plot has decaffeinated the entertainment kick.
Disney is dead (and Walt is rolling over in his grave!). It bought into the gender bender blender and climateering shakedown and watched its stock decline 50% and then another 50%! Don’t these bozos know that entertainment is a business! That Disney is a children’s entertainment business! liked a WUWT comment in that thread that a blockbuster movie on climate that told of the destruction of civilization by totalitarian money grubbing billionaires replacing clean, reliable and affordable energy by expensive renewables that dont work, gutting industry and agriculture and causing uncounted millions of casualties to rival the bloody “Policy-Caused” horrors of the 20th century.
Disney is dead
But Iger has a plan!
Shakespeare would disagree with you.
No, he wouldn’t. Shakespeare’s plays were as often shut down by the Lord Chamberlain as any other; propaganda would not have been shut down at all.
I refer you to Richard III.
Richard III is an oddity – I would suggest it was less propaganda (the Plantaganets were 3 or 4 Monarchs previous, they were long gone from the picture) and more currying favour with the pro-Tudor public. To blindly assert that Richard III is pure propaganda is to ignore all history and context.
In actual fact if you read Richard III as it is meant to be read/played, in full (not just the gory/exciting bits) and as a sequel to Henry VI parts 1-3, you find that Shakespeare is quite sympathetic to Richard as a tragic figure caught up in events unfolding over generations. Don’t buy into the Richard III society’s blanket and unthinking tarring of Shakespeare as a Tudor propagandist, read more on the subject. There was a certain amount of Tudor propaganda regarding the Plantaganets and legitimising Henry VII (ap Tewdor) but it was written before Shakespeare wrote his tragedy in which he’s not unsympathetic to Richard, although many of his sources may have been or used Tudor propaganda.
Wow, Mr Page
Let’s just say I’ve been aware of the Richard III society’s work for some 30 or 40 years and I really don’t agree with a lot of it.
______________________________________________________________
Nothing new about that:
“We have to offer up scary scenarios… each of us has to decide
the right balance between being effective and being honest.”
Stephen Schneider, lead IPCC author, 1989
What they need is a choir…
No drilling! No drilling!’: climate choir sings truth to power in Palace of Westminsterhttps://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/mar/07/no-drilling-climate-choir-sings-truth-power-parliament
‘Truth to power’ has become a much abused meme, especially when the opposite appears to be true.
I quite enjoy watching “The Day After Tomorrow” and “Snowpiercer”, they are fast paced engaging adventure movies. But they are the exception rather than the norm when it comes to climate movies.
Haven’t seen TDAT, but with Snowpiercer, the climate stuff was only a setup for the main story, so it didn’t really impact the story much at all.
That’s probably why it worked.
From a New York state energy expert about a great writer, Irina Slav from Bulgaria, featured at OilPrice.com
At the same website is Tsvetana Paraskova from Bulgaria. They are the two best energy reporters I know of, and I frequently recommend their articles on my blog.’
The Honest Climate Science and Energy Blog
This is undoubtedly true. I recently went to the season opener of the local drive-in movie theater and saw Dune II and Aquaman II. Dune always had a slight environmental component, but it was more in the way of backstory to set up the action.
Aquaman II, though, was a CACA lovefest. In the first 15 minutes AGW themes had been introduced over a dozen times. At that point I had enough, packed up my lawn chairs and left the park. Talking to my adult son later that week, he pointed out that I had done the right thing. He watched in a theater with a friend and said it only got worse from there. He is much more liberal than I and still wanted to get up and leave. He said the injection of CAGW into basically every scene made the movie unwatchable. In the end he said he sat there in morbid curiosity trying to figure out how they were going to save the movie and earn their money back. He left wondering who their test audience was because it failed to deliver, spectacularly.
I’ve got the impression from watching a few Hollywood films over the last few years that they are cash cows for the studios that are arrogant enough to believe they can put out any old rubbish with kewl camera angles and CGI effects, and they’ll get some brainless teenagers to lap it up. Hollywood is most definitely not what it once was.
Not sure if any readers here are fans of Leftfield .. but I went immediately to the lyrics of “Open Up” when I saw the title of this post. Maybe the author is a fan? … I am a fan for sure . Check it out .. very appropriate to this post.
https://genius.com/Leftfield-open-up-lyrics
I don’t think I can be a fan as I haven’t the foggiest idea what you’re talking about. But do enjoy it, whatever it is.