Search Climate Insights Directory

The document is an open letter from students and junior professionals in the advertising and PR industry demanding that agencies stop working with fossil fuel companies. The authors argue that the marketing industry facilitates climate inaction by amplifying disinformation and greenwashing for the world's largest polluters. They urge agency leadership to take a stand and encourage current employees to challenge their leadership or reject fossil fuel projects.

The brief contends that fossil fuel companies have engaged in a long-term strategy of deception, shifting from explicit denial to framing climate change as a manageable 'risk' and shifting responsibility to individual consumers. It provides evidence that companies like BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and Shell promote themselves as clean energy leaders while maintaining massive investments in fossil fuels and funding third-party organizations to undermine climate science.

The report identifies 90 advertising and PR companies working for the fossil fuel industry, highlighting a conflict between the sustainability pledges of major holding companies and their continued representation of high-polluting clients. It details specific case studies of disinformation and lobbying efforts in the US, Australia, and the EU, while warning that the term 'Net Zero' is being used as a primary tool for greenwashing ahead of the 2021 Glasgow climate talks.

The report finds that while about one-third of Americans have engaged in consumer activism by rewarding or punishing companies based on their climate actions, there is a significant intent among 41% of the population to increase these activities. Barriers to activism include a lack of knowledge about which companies to target and a perceived lack of individual influence. There is broad public support for companies taking climate-friendly actions, such as using renewable energy and avoiding the funding of climate-denying candidates, with particularly high expectations for fossil fuel, airline, and automotive industries.

The document is an open letter from emerging professionals in the advertising and PR sectors who argue that their industry is facilitating climate inaction by working for fossil fuel companies. The authors demand that agencies stop representing oil, gas, and coal companies, as well as their associated trade associations and front groups, to end the spread of climate denial and greenwashing. They urge current agency leadership and employees to reject fossil fuel projects and sign the Clean Creatives pledge to ensure a viable future for the next generation.

The text examines the transition from 'public democracy' to 'platform democracy,' where social media algorithms prioritize sensationalism and disinformation over facts to maximize advertising revenue. It highlights how this environment undermines shared truths, citing examples like Donald Trump's use of misinformation and the role of bots in spreading climate change denial. The author proposes legislative interventions, such as mandatory fact-checking for users who encounter disinformation, the banning of micro-targeting, and the promotion of non-commercial platforms like Mastodon and Peertube. Furthermore, it advocates for treating large platforms as news organizations that must promote independent, ethically grounded journalism to reduce polarization and protect democratic stability.

The IAI Directorate is participating in a two-year Interacademy Partnership initiative to define, measure, and address the impact of predatory academic journals and conferences. A global survey of over 1,800 researchers indicates that 11% have published in predatory journals and 4% have attended predatory conferences, with over 80% of respondents viewing these practices as a serious or growing problem. The initiative aims to identify root causes—such as lack of awareness and career pressures—and provide recommendations to prevent the erosion of public trust in research and the spread of misinformation in public policy. A full report is expected in late 2021.

A group of Connecticut-based academics and professionals expresses support for legal action against ExxonMobil, alleging the company spent decades spreading disinformation about climate change despite internal knowledge of the risks since the 1960s. The letter highlights specific climate threats to Connecticut, including increased extreme heat and tidal flooding, and argues that the company should pay for damages and adaptation measures.

The report analyses a network of 40 geolocated Australian Gab accounts, finding that the platform serves as a hub for antisemitism, white supremacy, and COVID-19 disinformation. Activity spiked between June and August 2020, coinciding with global Black Lives Matter protests and Melbourne lockdowns. A small number of highly active accounts drove the majority of content, often promoting conspiracy theories about a 'Marxist' infiltration of Western institutions and calling for white separatism or violence.

Twenty-two environmental and climate justice organizations, coordinated by Clean Creatives, are urging PR and advertising agencies to stop working with the fossil fuel industry. The groups argue that these agencies profit from campaigns that spread climate disinformation, greenwash the image of oil, gas, and coal companies, and block climate action, which disproportionately harms Black, Indigenous, and other communities of color.

A March 2021 poll of 640 registered voters in Washington State shows high levels of concern regarding climate change and strong support for holding oil and gas companies financially responsible for climate impacts. A majority of respondents (73%) believe oil and gas companies are not paying their fair share of climate costs, and 61% support suing these companies for damages. After receiving additional information about industry disinformation, the proportion of respondents who believe oil and gas companies should be most responsible for upgrading state infrastructure rose to 37%.

The document analyzes the evolution of the public sphere from physical spaces to digital networks, arguing that while technology offers potential for inclusion, it has also enabled state and corporate control, misinformation, and the marginalization of vulnerable groups. It highlights the importance of 'public interest media' and 'communicative action' to foster democratic accountability. Through case studies in India, Latin America, Palestine, and Ecuador, the text illustrates how marginalized communities use alternative media—such as feminist journalism in India (Khabar Lahariya) and community radio in Ecuador (CORAPE)—to resist hegemony and reclaim their right to communicate. It concludes by advocating for regulatory frameworks that prioritize human rights and digital justice over market logic.

The document analyzes the private sector's engagement with sustainable development, moving from a history of disinformation and lobbying against regulation to a current landscape of sustainability pledges and impact investing. It argues that while 'greening' existing systems is valuable, true sustainability requires a shift toward 'regenerative equity' through Sustainability-Oriented Hybrid Organizations (SOHOs) that prioritize people and nature over profit-driven growth.

The text examines how social media algorithms and bots facilitate the spread of disinformation, specifically citing climate change denial and political manipulation. It proposes that governments implement legislation requiring platforms to show fact-checks to users who have seen disinformation and suggests treating large platforms as news organizations. Additionally, it advocates for the financial support of independent journalism through subsidies and a ban on microtargeting to ensure a healthy democratic debate based on shared facts.

The study analyzed 6.8 million tweets to determine the influence of bots on climate change discourse. While the immediate response to President Trump's announcement of the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement showed low bot presence, suspected bots were responsible for approximately 25% of original tweets before and after the event, particularly within denialist discourses.

The report examines the role of the advertising and PR industry in supporting fossil fuel companies, arguing that these agencies facilitate greenwashing and disinformation. It highlights a growing movement of professionals rejecting such work and documents the contradiction between the sustainability pledges of major agency holding companies and their continued representation of high-polluting clients. The document provides a list of 90 agencies working for the fossil fuel industry and presents case studies of misleading campaigns in Australia, the United States, and Europe.

The COVID-19 Vaccine Communication Handbook offers evidence-based strategies to increase vaccine uptake and counter misinformation. It emphasizes the role of healthcare providers as trusted influencers, advocating for an 'active listening' approach over directive education. The guide details techniques for 'prebunking' (inoculation) against common reasoning flaws—categorized by the FLICC framework—and provides a structured method for debunking existing myths. It also highlights the importance of community engagement and the use of 'nudges' to reduce the spread of the 'infodemic' on social media.

The document describes a sophisticated 'denial machine' in the United States composed of ten key player types—including corporations, think tanks, and conservative media—that use a multi-tiered 'playbook' of long, medium, and short-term strategies to disseminate misinformation and block climate mitigation policies.

The document argues that transparency is a prerequisite for public trust and democratic accountability in the digital sphere. It critiques current corporate transparency reports as insufficient, citing evidence that platforms like Facebook often underreport the scale of coordinated inauthentic activity. The report details a shift from 'notice-and-takedown' content regulation toward 'systemic' approaches, such as 'Safety by Design,' which require platforms to mitigate risks through their architecture and algorithms. It provides a detailed analysis of the EU's Digital Services Act (DSA) and the UK's Online Safety Bill (OSB), highlighting their tiered obligations based on platform size and the introduction of independent audits. Finally, it presents five theoretical models of internet governance—Corporate, Autocratic, Libertarian, Machine, and EU/Liberal-Democratic—to illustrate the geopolitical struggle over the future of digital sovereignty and human rights.

The report details the transition from the term 'climate dictatorship' to 'climate lockdown' in German social media, identifying key political triggers and the role of platforms like Telegram in fusing climate skepticism with broader conspiracy theories such as the Great Reset.