WEBVTT - Climate Guilt, Brought to You by Big Oil

0:00:11.280 --> 0:00:14.880
<v Speaker 1>Hello, Welcome to Drill. This is Amy Westerveldt. I'm here

0:00:14.960 --> 0:00:17.920
<v Speaker 1>today with a bit of an update to the history

0:00:17.960 --> 0:00:22.119
<v Speaker 1>we chronicled in season three, where we looked at the

0:00:22.239 --> 0:00:26.960
<v Speaker 1>last one hundred or so years of fossil fuel propaganda.

0:00:27.400 --> 0:00:30.960
<v Speaker 1>A new study from Harvard researchers Jeffrey Supran and Naomi A.

0:00:31.000 --> 0:00:36.200
<v Speaker 1>Risquez highlights how Exonmobile in particular, has used language both

0:00:36.200 --> 0:00:39.879
<v Speaker 1>to undermine climate action and to push the idea that

0:00:39.960 --> 0:00:44.279
<v Speaker 1>it's an individual consumer problem, not anything to do with

0:00:44.320 --> 0:00:48.080
<v Speaker 1>them or the systems they helped to create and continue

0:00:48.120 --> 0:00:51.839
<v Speaker 1>to profit from. Lead researcher Jeffrey Supran join me to

0:00:51.920 --> 0:00:54.440
<v Speaker 1>talk through the studies' findings and what they mean for

0:00:54.520 --> 0:00:59.120
<v Speaker 1>climate action more broadly, and what they might mean for

0:00:59.200 --> 0:01:01.840
<v Speaker 1>the two dozen ors so climate cases making their way

0:01:01.880 --> 0:01:04.840
<v Speaker 1>through the courts at the moment. That conversation coming up

0:01:05.000 --> 0:01:06.480
<v Speaker 1>after this quick break.

0:01:16.200 --> 0:01:18.480
<v Speaker 2>So basically, if if you run a do some code

0:01:18.560 --> 0:01:22.240
<v Speaker 2>to say what words appear? I think within plus or

0:01:22.240 --> 0:01:25.440
<v Speaker 2>minus five words of the words climate change and global warming,

0:01:25.720 --> 0:01:28.160
<v Speaker 2>there is literally no word or phrase that is more

0:01:28.200 --> 0:01:31.960
<v Speaker 2>common than risk or risks. So it basically became their

0:01:32.080 --> 0:01:36.160
<v Speaker 2>their watchword throughout throughout the two thousands, and likewise, in

0:01:36.240 --> 0:01:40.119
<v Speaker 2>terms of the words that individualized responsibility, all the same

0:01:40.200 --> 0:01:44.880
<v Speaker 2>keywords pop up regarding meeting the energy demand of consumers,

0:01:45.160 --> 0:01:47.520
<v Speaker 2>you know, meeting the needs, all these kinds of words.

0:01:47.680 --> 0:01:49.840
<v Speaker 3>Did you find that you know, the word risk was

0:01:50.040 --> 0:01:54.080
<v Speaker 3>used to in a way to introduce doubt, like it's

0:01:54.120 --> 0:01:57.040
<v Speaker 3>a risk, but it's uncertainty. Was it that kind of

0:01:57.080 --> 0:01:59.480
<v Speaker 3>framing or how how is it being used?

0:02:00.240 --> 0:02:05.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah? Right, So essentially they describe they talk about climate

0:02:05.160 --> 0:02:09.320
<v Speaker 2>risk risks, you know, long term risk, potential risks, potential

0:02:09.360 --> 0:02:12.560
<v Speaker 2>long term risks, all permutations on the word risk. And

0:02:13.080 --> 0:02:17.520
<v Speaker 2>our interpretation is that Exomobile used risk just as they

0:02:17.520 --> 0:02:22.160
<v Speaker 2>have used other rhetorical cousins like uncertainty and more research

0:02:22.240 --> 0:02:26.080
<v Speaker 2>and sound science, essentially the same intention of what's sometimes

0:02:26.120 --> 0:02:31.280
<v Speaker 2>called strategic ambiguity. It's exactly what the tobacco industry did,

0:02:31.560 --> 0:02:37.480
<v Speaker 2>which is to shift the conversation from semantics, from concepts

0:02:37.480 --> 0:02:41.120
<v Speaker 2>of reality to concepts of risk. And it's a very

0:02:41.160 --> 0:02:45.440
<v Speaker 2>clever trick because you inject uncertainty into the narrative into

0:02:45.440 --> 0:02:50.080
<v Speaker 2>the discourse about climate change while superficially not appearing to

0:02:50.120 --> 0:02:53.800
<v Speaker 2>do so so. Essentially, rather than correcting the record and

0:02:53.840 --> 0:02:57.120
<v Speaker 2>acknowledging how they previously promoted out. They just changed the

0:02:57.160 --> 0:02:59.680
<v Speaker 2>subject a little bit. You know, risk is something that

0:02:59.720 --> 0:03:03.520
<v Speaker 2>may may not happen, and by characterizing climate change as

0:03:03.520 --> 0:03:08.120
<v Speaker 2>a risk, they implicitly implied that it was not a reality,

0:03:08.680 --> 0:03:12.680
<v Speaker 2>even after clearly climate scientists had demonstrated that it was happening,

0:03:12.919 --> 0:03:14.760
<v Speaker 2>that it is happening. And yeah, the thing that I

0:03:14.840 --> 0:03:17.600
<v Speaker 2>think really gives us confidence in the use of this

0:03:18.160 --> 0:03:22.720
<v Speaker 2>rhetorical tool is that it exactly mirrors the tobacco industry strategy.

0:03:22.760 --> 0:03:25.960
<v Speaker 2>They did exactly the same thing, both for as a

0:03:25.960 --> 0:03:30.120
<v Speaker 2>public relations tactics and also as a legal defense one.

0:03:30.280 --> 0:03:32.400
<v Speaker 3>That's interesting. So can you talk a little bit about

0:03:32.400 --> 0:03:36.240
<v Speaker 3>that part, how you mapped this to what the tobacco

0:03:36.320 --> 0:03:39.000
<v Speaker 3>industry was doing as well.

0:03:39.360 --> 0:03:42.040
<v Speaker 2>Sure. Yeah, Well, the way it first came up was

0:03:43.240 --> 0:03:47.240
<v Speaker 2>running these so called Corpus comparison algorithms, so looking at,

0:03:47.440 --> 0:03:51.000
<v Speaker 2>you know, what terms appear over or underused in one

0:03:51.000 --> 0:03:54.880
<v Speaker 2>set of documents compared to another. And this term risk

0:03:55.000 --> 0:03:57.960
<v Speaker 2>and risks started jumping out very early to us. And

0:03:58.560 --> 0:04:01.400
<v Speaker 2>I just happened to know that Robert Procter, who's a

0:04:01.440 --> 0:04:05.360
<v Speaker 2>tobacco historian, had written quite extensively about the use of

0:04:05.440 --> 0:04:08.640
<v Speaker 2>risk as what he calls a legal having it both ways.

0:04:09.160 --> 0:04:12.480
<v Speaker 2>So essentially, you know, an admission strong enough to ward

0:04:12.480 --> 0:04:15.760
<v Speaker 2>off accusations of failing to warn the public, but at

0:04:15.760 --> 0:04:18.960
<v Speaker 2>the same time weak enough to kind of exculpate them

0:04:19.040 --> 0:04:22.800
<v Speaker 2>from charges of having just marketed this deadly product. And

0:04:22.880 --> 0:04:25.880
<v Speaker 2>it was that parallel that I noticed with the word

0:04:25.960 --> 0:04:29.360
<v Speaker 2>risk that really started to encourage me to latch on to,

0:04:29.880 --> 0:04:32.120
<v Speaker 2>you know what, other parallels, what might we be seeing.

0:04:32.520 --> 0:04:35.280
<v Speaker 2>And so it was in the process of looking at

0:04:35.320 --> 0:04:38.279
<v Speaker 2>other terms and other discourses that are constructed, that we

0:04:38.360 --> 0:04:41.560
<v Speaker 2>started to realize they were also promoting this shift of

0:04:41.600 --> 0:04:46.440
<v Speaker 2>responsibility away from the company and onto consumers by publicly

0:04:46.480 --> 0:04:51.000
<v Speaker 2>fixating on consumer energy demand rather than the fossil fuels

0:04:51.000 --> 0:04:54.159
<v Speaker 2>that the company supplies. And in that regard too, I

0:04:54.279 --> 0:04:56.960
<v Speaker 2>then came across another study from just a few years

0:04:57.000 --> 0:05:00.359
<v Speaker 2>ago that really in detail laid out exactly how the

0:05:00.360 --> 0:05:02.960
<v Speaker 2>tobacco industry had done this too. In the case of

0:05:03.000 --> 0:05:06.839
<v Speaker 2>the tobacco industry, they played a two pronged approach where

0:05:07.040 --> 0:05:11.440
<v Speaker 2>in public they used so called demand as liberty, and

0:05:11.520 --> 0:05:15.800
<v Speaker 2>in litigation in defense against lawsuits, they flipped it flip

0:05:15.880 --> 0:05:19.080
<v Speaker 2>the script and basically talked about Demander's blame And what

0:05:19.120 --> 0:05:21.560
<v Speaker 2>we've essentially found is Exo Mobile have done exactly the

0:05:21.600 --> 0:05:25.159
<v Speaker 2>same thing in a slightly different way. The nuances are

0:05:25.160 --> 0:05:28.200
<v Speaker 2>slightly different, but the overall pattern is the same, which

0:05:28.240 --> 0:05:32.719
<v Speaker 2>is that demand is used in public to very subtly

0:05:33.000 --> 0:05:36.800
<v Speaker 2>put the responsibility on the shoulders of the public, and

0:05:36.839 --> 0:05:39.159
<v Speaker 2>then when it comes to defending itself in court, the

0:05:39.160 --> 0:05:41.920
<v Speaker 2>gloves will come off a little bit and they'll really

0:05:42.000 --> 0:05:45.960
<v Speaker 2>double down on that Demander's blame rhetoric. So this is

0:05:46.000 --> 0:05:49.000
<v Speaker 2>really exciting. This is interesting to us because not only

0:05:49.080 --> 0:05:54.800
<v Speaker 2>are the existing patterns evident, but it also these insights

0:05:54.839 --> 0:06:00.479
<v Speaker 2>allow us to begin to foresee how their defense against

0:06:00.640 --> 0:06:03.839
<v Speaker 2>litigation and activism is going to expand in the coming years.

0:06:04.120 --> 0:06:06.400
<v Speaker 2>So we're just starting to see the first early warning

0:06:06.440 --> 0:06:08.960
<v Speaker 2>signs of that strategy, that that blame game that they're playing.

0:06:09.440 --> 0:06:12.720
<v Speaker 3>That was actually like a big part of the decision

0:06:12.760 --> 0:06:17.640
<v Speaker 3>in San Francisco exactly. Yeah, Judge Alsop's ruling, like he

0:06:17.760 --> 0:06:21.040
<v Speaker 3>kind of talked about that, It's like, well, sure, you know,

0:06:21.279 --> 0:06:23.520
<v Speaker 3>and that was very much the argument that was being

0:06:23.560 --> 0:06:27.200
<v Speaker 3>made too, is that you know, hey, we're just fulfilling it, right,

0:06:27.440 --> 0:06:32.240
<v Speaker 3>and without us, the industrial revolution wouldn't have happened all this, right.

0:06:33.240 --> 0:06:35.920
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, right, right, right, yeah, yeah, no, So that's actually

0:06:35.960 --> 0:06:38.960
<v Speaker 2>I mean, we point this out in the paper that

0:06:39.480 --> 0:06:43.880
<v Speaker 2>the reason Judge us Up made that decision was very much,

0:06:44.279 --> 0:06:47.040
<v Speaker 2>you know, in response to the argument being made by

0:06:47.200 --> 0:06:49.839
<v Speaker 2>Chevron's lawyer and defense of x On and other companies,

0:06:49.880 --> 0:06:54.560
<v Speaker 2>where he very explicitly said, it's not production that is

0:06:54.600 --> 0:06:58.120
<v Speaker 2>causing greenhouse gas missions, it's consumers. It's the demand. It's

0:06:58.200 --> 0:07:00.800
<v Speaker 2>quote the way that people are living their lives. Yeah, yeah,

0:07:01.120 --> 0:07:03.800
<v Speaker 2>And you know, of course we're the first to acknowledge

0:07:03.920 --> 0:07:07.719
<v Speaker 2>that demand is a legitimate part of the climate problem

0:07:07.760 --> 0:07:10.280
<v Speaker 2>and its solution, but it's not the only part, and

0:07:10.360 --> 0:07:13.960
<v Speaker 2>it's not actually the business focus of Exomobile, which is

0:07:14.000 --> 0:07:18.240
<v Speaker 2>a supplier company. So this this very intriguing. This is

0:07:18.320 --> 0:07:23.280
<v Speaker 2>very intriguing and convenient. I came across a few years

0:07:23.280 --> 0:07:27.239
<v Speaker 2>ago the fact that BP had first promoted the concept

0:07:27.280 --> 0:07:29.920
<v Speaker 2>of carbon footprint in two thousand and four, two thousand

0:07:29.960 --> 0:07:31.960
<v Speaker 2>and six, and so that you know, I think has

0:07:32.040 --> 0:07:38.560
<v Speaker 2>really helped to kind of anecdotally demonstrate the role of

0:07:38.600 --> 0:07:44.280
<v Speaker 2>the fossil fee industry in promoting these individualized responsibility narratives.

0:07:44.680 --> 0:07:47.200
<v Speaker 2>But what we think we're doing for the first time

0:07:47.200 --> 0:07:51.680
<v Speaker 2>with this work is to actually systematically and empirically prove

0:07:52.200 --> 0:07:56.400
<v Speaker 2>in this case Exo Mobile's role in encouraging and embodying

0:07:56.480 --> 0:07:59.559
<v Speaker 2>those discourses. It's not to say, you know, of course

0:07:59.600 --> 0:08:02.360
<v Speaker 2>the X mobile has done this alone. It's it's been

0:08:02.440 --> 0:08:07.360
<v Speaker 2>part of a massive individualization effort by the fossil free

0:08:07.360 --> 0:08:11.040
<v Speaker 2>industry seemingly writ large, and also just industries in general.

0:08:11.080 --> 0:08:13.480
<v Speaker 2>That comes and it's so subtle, Like you know, Naomi

0:08:13.480 --> 0:08:17.320
<v Speaker 2>and I analyze these advertorials previously from you know, through

0:08:17.360 --> 0:08:22.280
<v Speaker 2>the lens of analyzing explicit doubts and climate denial, and

0:08:23.160 --> 0:08:28.600
<v Speaker 2>it basically escaped unnoticed that there was this systematic usage

0:08:28.640 --> 0:08:32.920
<v Speaker 2>of of of terms and topics to to yeah, to

0:08:32.920 --> 0:08:36.640
<v Speaker 2>to shift responsibility away from the company. But for me,

0:08:36.720 --> 0:08:38.920
<v Speaker 2>that's what makes it all the more important, because we're

0:08:38.960 --> 0:08:44.720
<v Speaker 2>starting to be able to flag genuinely insidious and subtle

0:08:44.760 --> 0:08:48.600
<v Speaker 2>propaganda that is shifting the way everyone thinks about this,

0:08:48.679 --> 0:08:50.520
<v Speaker 2>whether they realize it or not.

0:08:51.040 --> 0:08:55.520
<v Speaker 3>It sort of like laponizes American identity in a way too.

0:08:55.679 --> 0:08:59.800
<v Speaker 2>That's right, that's right, that's right, that's right, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

0:08:59.840 --> 0:09:02.000
<v Speaker 2>We we briefly touch on near the end of the

0:09:02.000 --> 0:09:05.480
<v Speaker 2>paper how you know it too. It's too massive of

0:09:05.520 --> 0:09:08.040
<v Speaker 2>a separate thing to go into the details of how

0:09:08.440 --> 0:09:13.520
<v Speaker 2>sociologically that sort of quote unquote rugged individualism has has

0:09:13.679 --> 0:09:17.040
<v Speaker 2>entrenched itself in American culture and ideology, but it really has.

0:09:17.120 --> 0:09:20.360
<v Speaker 2>And so we briefly note that what it really seems

0:09:20.360 --> 0:09:25.640
<v Speaker 2>like Examobile did was to tap into that individualizing of

0:09:25.720 --> 0:09:28.080
<v Speaker 2>society and risk that has been happening of the last

0:09:28.080 --> 0:09:32.680
<v Speaker 2>few decades and really bring it to bear on climate change. So, yeah,

0:09:32.720 --> 0:09:34.719
<v Speaker 2>it's one piece of the puzzle, and we think it's

0:09:34.720 --> 0:09:38.640
<v Speaker 2>an important one because it's the first definitive proof of

0:09:38.679 --> 0:09:41.719
<v Speaker 2>these kinds of subtle strategies, which, by the way, I

0:09:41.720 --> 0:09:44.200
<v Speaker 2>think you would enjoy. We include a quote in here

0:09:44.280 --> 0:09:46.680
<v Speaker 2>from Herbs Schmertz where I don't know if you saw it,

0:09:46.720 --> 0:09:51.400
<v Speaker 2>but yeah, yeah, where he specifically in his book says

0:09:51.520 --> 0:09:55.560
<v Speaker 2>he calls the first guiding principle of He says, the

0:09:55.559 --> 0:09:58.800
<v Speaker 2>first guiding principle of public affairs is to quote unquote

0:09:58.880 --> 0:10:01.920
<v Speaker 2>quote grab the gro words and stick your opponents with

0:10:01.960 --> 0:10:07.440
<v Speaker 2>the bad ones. And he specifically talks about the power

0:10:07.480 --> 0:10:11.080
<v Speaker 2>of I think he calls it semantic infiltration, whereby he

0:10:11.120 --> 0:10:13.760
<v Speaker 2>says it's the process, whereby language does the dirty work

0:10:13.760 --> 0:10:17.640
<v Speaker 2>of politics, and that is exactly what we're seeing here.

0:10:17.800 --> 0:10:20.880
<v Speaker 3>That's really interesting, well, because you know, I mean I

0:10:21.200 --> 0:10:22.920
<v Speaker 3>I do. You see it all the time that like

0:10:22.960 --> 0:10:25.959
<v Speaker 3>the industry really tries to position itself as like the

0:10:26.000 --> 0:10:29.520
<v Speaker 3>only demand side only industry in the world.

0:10:30.640 --> 0:10:36.679
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, Yeah, that's right. It's the it's

0:10:36.679 --> 0:10:39.800
<v Speaker 4>the only it's the only problem and the only industry

0:10:40.000 --> 0:10:43.200
<v Speaker 4>where the only solutions are demand side. There is nothing

0:10:43.240 --> 0:10:44.800
<v Speaker 4>to be done on the supply side.

0:10:44.920 --> 0:10:45.880
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, it's crazy.

0:10:46.080 --> 0:10:49.480
<v Speaker 2>Framed in the context of anything else, it would sound ridiculous, right, Yeah,

0:10:49.520 --> 0:10:50.640
<v Speaker 2>it's totally ridiculous.

0:10:50.640 --> 0:10:53.920
<v Speaker 3>And you see just how much bullshit it is when

0:10:54.000 --> 0:10:57.800
<v Speaker 3>you look at what they did, you know, in the eighties,

0:10:57.880 --> 0:11:01.880
<v Speaker 3>when there was no longer sort of restricted supply problem,

0:11:02.480 --> 0:11:07.120
<v Speaker 3>but Americans had gotten really good at energy efficiency. I

0:11:07.200 --> 0:11:11.679
<v Speaker 3>found all these old Chevron shareholder magazines where you were

0:11:11.720 --> 0:11:15.000
<v Speaker 3>really freaking out about the fact that, Okay, we have

0:11:15.840 --> 0:11:20.120
<v Speaker 3>more supply now, but demand is remaining flat because people

0:11:20.120 --> 0:11:24.080
<v Speaker 3>have gotten so good at conserving energy. They were like,

0:11:24.120 --> 0:11:26.880
<v Speaker 3>what are we going to do to get demand back up,

0:11:26.960 --> 0:11:31.920
<v Speaker 3>and they are dropped prices. Whenever there's a of some kind,

0:11:32.080 --> 0:11:35.160
<v Speaker 3>they fiddle with the pricing to drive demand. Or I mean,

0:11:35.200 --> 0:11:37.960
<v Speaker 3>even if you look at what's happening with the natural

0:11:38.040 --> 0:11:42.240
<v Speaker 3>gas glut and the plastics stuff, you know, they just

0:11:42.800 --> 0:11:44.400
<v Speaker 3>found another criket for it.

0:11:44.559 --> 0:11:47.160
<v Speaker 2>And also just more at the at the human scale

0:11:47.200 --> 0:11:50.040
<v Speaker 2>that I think people can relate to, you know, I

0:11:50.040 --> 0:11:53.960
<v Speaker 2>mean I've been I've given many talks where some guy

0:11:54.000 --> 0:11:55.520
<v Speaker 2>at the back has stood up and said, I'm a

0:11:55.600 --> 0:11:59.360
<v Speaker 2>hypocrite because my shoes contain you know, rubber or something.

0:12:00.120 --> 0:12:04.720
<v Speaker 2>Those accusations of hypocrisy level that climate academics and activists

0:12:04.760 --> 0:12:07.959
<v Speaker 2>alike who criticize the fossil food industry. That's that's the

0:12:08.840 --> 0:12:14.760
<v Speaker 2>ground level manifestation of this this brainwashing. Frankly, Yeah, and

0:12:15.120 --> 0:12:18.480
<v Speaker 2>so I think it kind of that's the really profound

0:12:18.520 --> 0:12:21.840
<v Speaker 2>thing about this that it manifests itself at all scales

0:12:21.880 --> 0:12:25.160
<v Speaker 2>and all segments of society, whether it be the way

0:12:25.200 --> 0:12:28.160
<v Speaker 2>scholars and you know, scientists think about the kinds of

0:12:28.200 --> 0:12:32.160
<v Speaker 2>problems they're asking to the kind of stories journalists, right,

0:12:32.280 --> 0:12:35.439
<v Speaker 2>you know, and it's only really like you and Emily

0:12:35.480 --> 0:12:37.480
<v Speaker 2>and a few others who are kind of countering that now,

0:12:37.559 --> 0:12:40.640
<v Speaker 2>and whether it be you know, the average joe who

0:12:40.679 --> 0:12:42.880
<v Speaker 2>when you bring up climate change the number one thing

0:12:42.920 --> 0:12:45.280
<v Speaker 2>they think about is changing their light bulbs and stuff.

0:12:46.040 --> 0:12:50.040
<v Speaker 3>Right, that came up even with the crab fishermen that

0:12:50.240 --> 0:12:53.280
<v Speaker 3>doing the oil companies, even the ones actually that was

0:12:53.320 --> 0:12:56.320
<v Speaker 3>an interesting case because a lot of them didn't and

0:12:56.360 --> 0:12:59.640
<v Speaker 3>still don't believe that humans contribute to climate But the

0:12:59.800 --> 0:13:03.559
<v Speaker 3>whole thing was the companies had information that they were

0:13:03.720 --> 0:13:08.880
<v Speaker 3>using to make their companies more resilient to climate change,

0:13:09.480 --> 0:13:11.360
<v Speaker 3>and that they were keeping that information and that it

0:13:11.400 --> 0:13:14.760
<v Speaker 3>really doesn't matter what causes climate change, that they were

0:13:14.760 --> 0:13:18.960
<v Speaker 3>covering it up. But even the ones who who were

0:13:19.040 --> 0:13:23.400
<v Speaker 3>more you know, like actually like yes, think that climate

0:13:23.480 --> 0:13:24.960
<v Speaker 3>change is real and that we need to do something

0:13:25.000 --> 0:13:27.440
<v Speaker 3>about it and all that kind of stuff, they were

0:13:27.480 --> 0:13:31.480
<v Speaker 3>actually slower to join that suit because they were like,

0:13:31.520 --> 0:13:33.559
<v Speaker 3>but I'm a hypocrite because I drive a big boat

0:13:33.559 --> 0:13:34.440
<v Speaker 3>that burns diesel.

0:13:35.040 --> 0:13:35.400
<v Speaker 2>Wow.

0:13:35.559 --> 0:13:37.360
<v Speaker 3>Yes, it was crazy to me. I was like, Wow,

0:13:37.400 --> 0:13:42.240
<v Speaker 3>the people who are actual climate dryers are joining this suit,

0:13:42.360 --> 0:13:44.800
<v Speaker 3>and the people who actually believe that we need to

0:13:44.840 --> 0:13:47.960
<v Speaker 3>act on climate are the ones dragging their feet because

0:13:48.000 --> 0:13:50.480
<v Speaker 3>this hypocrisy thing is so strong.

0:13:50.920 --> 0:13:53.760
<v Speaker 2>That's the thing that if you're really focused on your

0:13:53.800 --> 0:13:58.439
<v Speaker 2>own sense of guilt and responsibility, you become hamstrung from

0:13:58.880 --> 0:14:01.400
<v Speaker 2>acting on what you know in order to hold the

0:14:01.440 --> 0:14:04.640
<v Speaker 2>systemic failures to account that are locking us into this

0:14:04.720 --> 0:14:06.760
<v Speaker 2>fossil fuel status croo society.

0:14:06.920 --> 0:14:09.520
<v Speaker 3>That's how powerful it is. So like, yes, it's subtle,

0:14:09.720 --> 0:14:11.960
<v Speaker 3>but that you're totally right that, I think that's what

0:14:12.120 --> 0:14:17.240
<v Speaker 3>makes it so much more powerful. Yeah, and especially it

0:14:17.280 --> 0:14:22.000
<v Speaker 3>like plays into all of these sort of societal structures too.

0:14:22.280 --> 0:14:25.480
<v Speaker 3>It's like that much effective.

0:14:25.120 --> 0:14:29.080
<v Speaker 2>Right, Yeah, well exactly that was and is the really

0:14:29.080 --> 0:14:32.560
<v Speaker 2>clever thing about Well, now we found the strategies that

0:14:32.600 --> 0:14:35.360
<v Speaker 2>both tobacco and fossil fuels are using, which is that

0:14:35.400 --> 0:14:40.440
<v Speaker 2>they cannot be pointed to so clearly, so blatantly as

0:14:40.800 --> 0:14:44.000
<v Speaker 2>you know, lying or falsehoods or anything like that, because

0:14:44.640 --> 0:14:49.480
<v Speaker 2>they basically draw on common and often correct pilance you know,

0:14:49.640 --> 0:14:53.120
<v Speaker 2>of journalists and academics and the public. It's just they're

0:14:53.200 --> 0:14:56.680
<v Speaker 2>kind of spinning these words in a in a confusing way.

0:14:56.920 --> 0:14:59.640
<v Speaker 2>But one other thing, just to flag out of interest,

0:15:00.160 --> 0:15:04.240
<v Speaker 2>is that we actually also likewise find sets of distinctive

0:15:04.320 --> 0:15:08.880
<v Speaker 2>terms that together communicate various other discourses of delay, as

0:15:08.880 --> 0:15:13.640
<v Speaker 2>we call them. So, you know, we find these systematic

0:15:13.720 --> 0:15:18.520
<v Speaker 2>usages of terms that together, for example, constitute greenwashing, that

0:15:18.600 --> 0:15:23.160
<v Speaker 2>constitute what we call fossil fuel solutionism, or that promote

0:15:23.240 --> 0:15:26.080
<v Speaker 2>concepts of energy poverty, and you know, things like that,

0:15:26.160 --> 0:15:29.360
<v Speaker 2>and these all weave together, you know, to construct this

0:15:29.440 --> 0:15:33.080
<v Speaker 2>fossil fuel savior frame that we that we identify. But

0:15:33.360 --> 0:15:35.880
<v Speaker 2>but yeah, I thought I really felt like the risk

0:15:35.960 --> 0:15:39.360
<v Speaker 2>and responsibility parts are the ones that haven't been kind

0:15:39.400 --> 0:15:44.000
<v Speaker 2>of hammered like people hasn't quite been kind of encapsulated

0:15:44.040 --> 0:15:46.600
<v Speaker 2>properly yet. So that's why we kind of focus on that.

0:15:46.680 --> 0:15:49.600
<v Speaker 3>I think that's super interesting. Well, I have this like

0:15:50.000 --> 0:15:54.640
<v Speaker 3>long running obsession with the idea that like the sort

0:15:54.680 --> 0:16:00.480
<v Speaker 3>of very entrenched personal responsibility narrative is sort of like

0:16:00.560 --> 0:16:03.600
<v Speaker 3>at the root of every problem in the US. Yeah, basically,

0:16:03.680 --> 0:16:08.520
<v Speaker 3>we're constantly asking individuals to solve systemic problems just with therapists, right,

0:16:08.680 --> 0:16:10.120
<v Speaker 3>usually consumer choices.

0:16:10.880 --> 0:16:11.120
<v Speaker 4>Yeah.

0:16:11.280 --> 0:16:13.160
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I mean that's the thing that kills me too,

0:16:13.240 --> 0:16:17.520
<v Speaker 3>is that individual action doesn't even get painted and political

0:16:17.600 --> 0:16:21.320
<v Speaker 3>action or activism or whatever, it's one hundred percent stuff.

0:16:21.080 --> 0:16:25.600
<v Speaker 2>You back, right, Yeah, Yeah, and we yeah, yeah, we's

0:16:25.760 --> 0:16:29.120
<v Speaker 2>that's our concluding point in the paper actually that we

0:16:29.440 --> 0:16:31.880
<v Speaker 2>quote another scholar who kind of wrote about this in

0:16:31.920 --> 0:16:34.280
<v Speaker 2>a more anecdotal way way back like in two thousand

0:16:34.320 --> 0:16:38.000
<v Speaker 2>and one. He calls it the narrowing of our environmental imagination,

0:16:38.560 --> 0:16:42.760
<v Speaker 2>you know, to consumers first and citizen second. And that's

0:16:42.800 --> 0:16:45.640
<v Speaker 2>our bottom line really that that's what's happened here, and

0:16:45.720 --> 0:16:48.360
<v Speaker 2>you're absolutely right. The other thing, just to flag with

0:16:48.400 --> 0:16:52.560
<v Speaker 2>the hypocrite thing is that someone called Jen Schneider. She

0:16:53.480 --> 0:16:56.560
<v Speaker 2>wrote a book called under Pressure, and we found that

0:16:56.680 --> 0:16:59.320
<v Speaker 2>useful in doing this work because that book, it's a

0:16:59.360 --> 0:17:04.560
<v Speaker 2>group of rhetoricians, you know, academics looking at specifically coal

0:17:04.600 --> 0:17:09.560
<v Speaker 2>industry rhetoric, and we draw on some of their terminology

0:17:09.640 --> 0:17:13.440
<v Speaker 2>for naming these discourses that we identify. One of their

0:17:13.560 --> 0:17:16.960
<v Speaker 2>terms that we don't actually use because we classify it

0:17:17.119 --> 0:17:20.520
<v Speaker 2>under individualized responsibility. But I think is really great is

0:17:20.560 --> 0:17:23.080
<v Speaker 2>they talk about the hypocrites trap. That's their name for

0:17:24.160 --> 0:17:27.320
<v Speaker 2>that rhetoric of hypocrisy. I'm just mentioning that because that

0:17:27.440 --> 0:17:29.000
<v Speaker 2>I think that's quite a cool book and one of

0:17:29.040 --> 0:17:32.560
<v Speaker 2>the only ones I've seen that also takes the time

0:17:32.640 --> 0:17:36.520
<v Speaker 2>to identify and name these things, because that's important, you know,

0:17:36.640 --> 0:17:39.680
<v Speaker 2>just developing this typology, just putting it out there.

0:17:40.040 --> 0:17:43.119
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, well, just making it clear that it's not like,

0:17:44.000 --> 0:17:46.680
<v Speaker 3>I think there's this thing that happens where people think

0:17:46.720 --> 0:17:49.480
<v Speaker 3>that it is some kind of natural.

0:17:49.440 --> 0:17:52.280
<v Speaker 2>Adotation or like organically.

0:17:51.720 --> 0:17:54.720
<v Speaker 3>Created you know, identity or whatever, and it's like, no.

0:17:54.920 --> 0:17:58.840
<v Speaker 2>This was this was like really this was engineers engineered.

0:17:58.920 --> 0:18:02.200
<v Speaker 3>And I think once people know that, then they can

0:18:02.240 --> 0:18:07.320
<v Speaker 3>evaluate it in that context and form opinions that way,

0:18:07.600 --> 0:18:11.800
<v Speaker 3>as opposed to just sort of that they're handed.

0:18:12.240 --> 0:18:15.680
<v Speaker 2>That's kind of what we want, what we hope people

0:18:15.760 --> 0:18:26.480
<v Speaker 2>will take from this study.

0:18:29.240 --> 0:18:31.840
<v Speaker 1>That's it for today. Big thanks to Jeffrey Supran for

0:18:31.920 --> 0:18:34.280
<v Speaker 1>joining us. You can find a link to the full

0:18:34.320 --> 0:18:37.560
<v Speaker 1>study in the show notes. Thanks for listening, and we'll

0:18:37.600 --> 0:18:39.520
<v Speaker 1>see you next week.

0:18:40.600 --> 0:18:40.639
<v Speaker 2>M