Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Washington Post Should Tell You When Its Columnists Are Paid to Disinform You
http://us10.campaign-archive1.com/?u=8c573daa3ad72f4a095505b58&id=ff7204ba34&e=ae188e3081Action Alert
The Washington Post Should Tell You When Its Columnists Are Paid to Disinform You
April 23, 2015
Ed RogersIf youre getting paid to advocate for the destruction of the world as we know it, shouldnt you at least let people know?
The Washington Post apparently doesnt think so.
The Post regularly publishes columns by Ed Rogers, a veteran of the Reagan/Bush administration turned lobbyist. His most recent column (4/20/15) is an attack on President Barack Obama for thinking that global warming is important:
Incredibly, in Sundays weekly video address, President Obama said, Today, there is no greater threat to our planet than climate change. I say incredibly because that just isnt trueand if President Obama really believes it is, then it is time to panic. Given the state of the world and the urgent problems facing us that directly affect our prospects for peace and prosperity, global warming shouldnt even be in the top five on the list of problems our president should be worrying about.
What are the many things more important than climate change? Um, the Ukraine crisis. Concern that the United States is retreating from global leadership. And at home, economic growth is anemic and job creation has stalled. There are other threats greater than global warming, tooat least two more, apparentlybut Rogers doesnt specify them.
His case for climate change not being a significant problem is, if anything, less detailed:
So why would our president say global warming is our biggest threat? Probably because it suits his ideology and his management style. The truth is, if you accept at face value everything he says about climate change, there is nothing he can do in the 20 months he has left in office that will appreciably affect the climate.
Thats pretty much it, before Rogers concludes, Lets hope somewhere there are advisers telling him that urgent matters need his focus and global warming is simply not the priority that he wants it to be. Theres nothing about sea level rise, crop failures, disease expansion, ocean acidification, etc.
So why would you ignore all the negative consequences of rapidly changing the Earths climate, and insist that instead of doing anything about it, we ought to meet a vague list of other problems with an even vaguer gesture toward supposed solutions (e.g., There is also a lot he could do to take the reins and provide American leadership around the world)? Well, maybe youre paid to do just that.
The Posts bio for Rogers notes that he is the chairman of the lobbying and communications firm BGR Group, but it doesnt give any clue who his clients are. Luckily, lobbyists are required by law to disclose their clients, a fact the media critic known as @crushingbort made good use of:
[Ed Rogers' oil & gas industry lobbying clients]
And thats just last year; in 2013, BGR got another $590,000 from Chevron, and $450,000 in 2012. In 2011, they got a million dollars form Gas Natural SDG, a Spanish methane-burning utility. And on and on.
What do you get when you give BGR that kind of money? Among other things, you get an employee who has a regular platform in the Washington Post, and has no qualms about advancing opinions that boost his clients profits. Dont think that isnt mentioned when the agency is soliciting business.
Its not clear how Post readers benefit from regular exposure to a lobbyist promoting his clients interests, but at the very least they should be informed that there is a connection between the views Rogers is espousing and the checks he is cashing.
Recently, Newsweek published an op-ed (4/11/15) attacking subsidies for wind powerand later put a note on it acknowledging that it was lacking in the disclosure department.
Editors note: The author of this piece, Randy Simmons, is the Charles G. Koch professor of political economy at Utah State University. Hes also a senior fellow at the Koch- and ExxonMobil-funded Property and Environment Research Center. These ties to the oil industry werent originally disclosed in this piece.
Newsweek (4/21/15) also published a rebuttal to the piece, providing an alternative view of wind power that wasnt funded by the fossil fuel industry.
For many years, Newsweek and the Washington Post were owned by the same company. Will the Post follow its former corporate siblings example and let its readers know that its columnist was expressing the views that hes paid to promote?
ACTION: Please ask the Washington Post to disclose when its columnists are writing about issues that they are paid to lobby aboutas with the recent column on climate change by Ed Rogers. Remember that respectful communication is the most effective.
CONTACT:
Washington Post op-ed editor Michael Larabee
Email: letters@washpost.com
Twitter: @PostOpinions
Copyright © 2015 Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting, All rights reserved.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
10 replies, 1095 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (25)
ReplyReply to this post
10 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Washington Post Should Tell You When Its Columnists Are Paid to Disinform You (Original Post)
G_j
Apr 2015
OP
WAPO used to be run and I thought owned by non fascist fucks. Maybe not anymore
NoJusticeNoPeace
Apr 2015
#2
It was purchased by Jeff Bezos. CEO of Amazon. That should tell you something. nt
okaawhatever
Apr 2015
#6
Business news demands full disclosure, or the audience will flee, but not political or opinion news?
Fred Sanders
Apr 2015
#3
It's called "Sponsored Content". That is when a company pays you to write a story that is favorable
okaawhatever
Apr 2015
#7
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)2. WAPO used to be run and I thought owned by non fascist fucks. Maybe not anymore
That they are also signing on to harassing Hillary based on a book by a known liar, I think they have lost my trust
okaawhatever
(9,469 posts)6. It was purchased by Jeff Bezos. CEO of Amazon. That should tell you something. nt
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)3. Business news demands full disclosure, or the audience will flee, but not political or opinion news?
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)4. Huge K&R We live in a propaganda state now.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)5. Not just the Washington Post. This goes on at many MSM
I was shocked to find out that it is not illegal.
Widespread and Legal...
okaawhatever
(9,469 posts)7. It's called "Sponsored Content". That is when a company pays you to write a story that is favorable
to them or their cause. (Not just a business a politician, interest group, etc.)
spanone
(135,905 posts)8. our democracy can no longer depend on a fair media. can a democracy exist without it?
i dunno.
madinmaryland
(64,933 posts)10. I'm confused. Isn't this on the op-Ed page?
Opinion pieces are exactly what they are. Opinion. Not news. All papers have an opinion section.
Or are they trying to pass an opinion piece off as news?