pinion TV Commercials and the Art of Deceit

At one time, saying, "I saw it on TV," added a degree of credibility to a statement. Of course that was long ago and short lived, but that hasn't stopped misrepresentations from being effective in terms of creating false public perceptions. Sometimes people hear what they want to hear and seek to have their biases confirmed, but one thing has been proven time and again; the more times your repeat something, the more people who will believe that it is true. For those with the resources to broadcast their messages repeatedly from the biggest platforms available, that dynamic often means the ability to manufacture consent – or at least indifference.

Albert Einstein said, "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the former." We are creatures of habit and most of us live with this wild notion that things happen the way they are suppose to. In the big universal and spiritual sense, I'm not sure that it isn't true. But in the real world, where the early bird gets the worm and not turning the wheel or applying the brakes means you're gonna crash -- things aren't quite that simple.

I am not suggesting we should be suspect of everything, yet keeping common sense close at hand and remembering that just because something is said over and over again doesn't make it true, would seem to be a good strategy. It also might be clever to remember -- "I saw it on TV" or the "internet," has migrated from being credible to being a joke. 

TV, newspapers and the internet are still the venues the cons and swindlers use to bring the confidence game into our world. Perhaps we think we are protected regarding most of the information we get through the media because it is monitored by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), but such is hardly the case.

The art of deceit is most often dressed-up as "trustworthy looking for trustworthy," and sharing a common goal. The mark (the one to be convinced), is swayed with props that suggest by sharing a perception, both parties will benefit or prosper. 

Today, these tactics are often used by large corporations in effort to sway opinion that best serves their political agenda -- one that eliminates or undermines the rules and regulations that govern them. It is those industries that pollute the most that benefit from this strategy. I realized that last Sunday morning when ConocoPhillips sprung their latest commercial into my morning breakfast, as I struggled to keep its contents down.

In that commercial; there are two women at a farmers' market talking about energy that was found "here, under the ground" -- and how important it is to protect the environment. They said, "It will provide jobs and it's safe." 

They were talking about fracking for natural gas. Sure it would be nice if these claims were true, but the talk of jobs is terribly inflated and it is very well documented that under no circumstance is it safe. Fracking is the most profitable method of retrieving gas for the energy industry, largely because many of its true costs are kicked down the line to be picked up by the community or society at large. Here are just two of the realities of fracking for gas and the horrible consequences in a clip from Gasland and also footage from A Neighbor to the Process. 

ConocoPhillips' record is not one of clean energy, but of mass destruction. They are being sued by the North China Sea Branch of the State Oceanic Administration (SOA) for billions of dollars, after a series of spills in Bohai Bay that have caused widespread environmental damage. The corporation was ranked 13th among U.S. corporate producers of air pollution by the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI). They have been responsible for massive oil spills, multiple fatal explosions, South American human rights violations and toxic dumping lawsuits. 

Conoco is a Fortune 500 company, the fifth largest private sector energy corporation in the world and is four times listed on Multinational Monitor's annual report as being one of the world's 10 worst corporations. ConocoPhillips has also won the distinction of having the worst environmental record of all oil companies except for Chevron. Chevron has earned what many environmental organizations have called the worst air, water and land polluters record on the planet. Although Exxon came in close on Chevron's heels, when Conoco wasn't there, Chevron has used every legal maneuver to escape what many call crimes against humanity. 

None of this comes out in their commercials, especially in their "we agree" series. In them, two people sort of talk over each other, from different perspectives, assuming that they have really been on the same page all along and only needed to get to this point to really understand. 

A $10.6 billion lawsuit that Brazilian prosecutors filed against Chevron Corp. over an offshore oil leak, might not get that point across, nor does there seem to be any agreement on the matter between the company and its victims. Brazil's Attorney General's Office found that Chevron and Transocean, the drilling contractor, were not capable of controlling the damage caused by the spill. "This is proof there is a lack of environmental planning and management by the companies," the prosecutors said. Here is a clip from CBS' 60 Minutes.

Ecuadoreans who recently won an $18 BILLION marathon-lawsuit against Chevron for environmental damage done to their country, couldn't get Chevron to agree to anything. The ruling was contested and escalated into the tens of billions of dollars.  

Chevron spent $2.9 million lobbying the federal government last quarter, eclipsing even Exxon ($2.6 million) and BP ($2.2 million), according to Senate disclosure forms, which seems like a remarkable ROI. Maybe that's where "we agree" comes from, their masterful ability to find agreement with the politicians they purchase.

It is odd how those companies that do the most damage to the environment are the very ones who make the biggest claims to do the most for it in their ads. When watching a Mosaic mining commercial, you would think that phosphate mining is the best idea for the planet since Earth Day, though nothing could be further from the truth. 

In one their many misleading commercials, there is a pristine green setting that is embracing wildlife along with claims of being scientist, environmentalist and custodians of nature. One only needs to use Google Earth to view central Florida's half a million acres of moonscape left by the miners that will be of little to no use to anyone for decades, if ever.

The phosphate companies are graced with loopholes that allow them to sign-off on a project without providing any reclamation, yet the job is classified as completed. The permits are designed to not payout on the royalties, that go to whoever is holding the mineral rights (quite often the state or county) -- so a variance is filed with an excuse as to why they can't perform the reclamation. That song and dance routinely grants forgiveness so land mineral rights holders can collect their royalties, but again, you won't see that in their commercials. 

The tens of millions of dollars Mosaic spends each year on TV and newspaper adds aren't selling product for them. Much of their phosphate is already slated for China and India. What that money buys is public relations through propaganda, a perception as to what is being given against what is being taken, beyond what one sees with their eyes -- moonscapes on the ground, depressed economies against billion-dollar balance sheets, environmental damage, etc. It also gives government officials a story they can hide behind, while they give away the more than 20 billion gallons of aquifer water annually that the industry uses to extrapolate phosphate. 

The commercials say "we recycle or reuse 95 percent of our water." What does it matter what one does with the 65 million gallons a day pumped from the ground, if everyday you take out that much water? What they are referring to when saying reuse is, they use it again to take the waste material away from their operations in big pipes to a giant stack where the waste will sit and the water will evaporate and do future generations no good as they struggle with growing populations and dwindling freshwater supply.

The truth is, there are bone valleys all over the world, much like the one in Florida. Millions of years ago, as the earth rose from the sea, entrapping and concentrating sea life to extinction, veins of condensed phosphate transforms. In most of the places in the world where these beds of phosphate appear, leaders won't sell-out their people's most precious resource, water, just so some industry can grubstake it -- enter the Sunshine State.

Deceitful commercials have become such a valuable source of revenue for the media, and a venue to manipulate political agendas, that it would be foolish to think it will ever stop. BP paraded a few hotels and business owners in their commercials so to get a picture of complete recovery. BP's recent $7.8 Billion settlement, to compensate for their responsibility in last year's Gulf disaster, is only a fraction of the cost for the damages that occured, and will excuse them from having to address any more of the devastation to those who suffered. I don't believe I am alone in thinking, that settlement has already been recouped at the pumps. (The oil industry receives more than $20 BILLION annually in subsidies from the Federal Government)

What to do? If what you are seeing in commercials, in the papers or hear on the radio, is by your opinion false and misleading, contact the FTC and or the FCC. Share with them your dissatisfaction to the ad that was presented to you. Here is a letter from noted hydroecologist Dr. Sydney Bacchus, about the Mosaic mining commercials currently being placed with local medias. Any contact information you might need is there.  

The networks and major print media will not publish what has been said in this piece because they are beholden to the revenue these industries are providing them in these strapped-for-cash times. Don't expect the government to get in their way either, for they are buying into the same phony sciences, which is quite often the only verbiage regulators want to hear, unless it effects them personally, because they are beholden as well.  

I often wonder why we think we have to go the other side of the globe to look for enemies when there are clearly so many right here at home -- but again, you'd never know it from the commercials and that's exactly the point.