One reason for setting up greenscamming organizations is that it is very difficult to communicate open anti-environmental movements or initiatives to the public as positive . Sociologist Charles Harper stresses that it would be very difficult for marketing departments to market a group with the hypothetical name "Coalition to Trash the Environment for Profit". Anti-environment initiatives are therefore often forced to give their front organizations deliberately deceptive names if they want to be successful in public . This is all the more important in view of the fact that surveys indicate that environmental protection is a social consensus. At the same time, however, there is a danger of being exposed as an anti-environmental initiative, which entails a considerable risk that the greenscamming activities backfire and are counterproductive for the initiators. Greenscamming organizations are very active in the organized climate denial scene, among others . An important financier of greenscamming organizations was the oil company ExxonMobil, which over the years financially supported more than 100 climate denial organizations and spent about 20 million US dollars on greenscamming groups. In many of these organizations, James Lawrence Powell identified their "admirable" designations as the most striking common feature, which for the most part sounded very rationalistic. In this context, he refers to a list of climate denial organizations drawn up by the Union of Concerned Scientists, which includes 43 organizations funded by the Exxonoil company. None of these organizations had a name from which to derive their opposition to climate change . The list is headed by the organization Africa Fighting Malaria, whose website features articles and commentaries opposing ambitious climate mitigation concepts, even though the dangers of malaria could be exacerbated by global warming.
One reason for setting up greenscamming organizations is the difficultly of openly communicating the benefits of activities that damage the environment . Sociologist Charles Harper stresses that it would be very difficult to market a group called "Coalition to Trash the Environment for Profit". Anti-environment initiatives are therefore often forced to give their front organizations deliberately deceptive names if they want to be successful . This is all the more important when surveys show that environmental protection has a social consensus. However, there is a danger of being exposed as an anti-environmental initiative, which entails a considerable risk that the greenscamming activities backfire and are counterproductive for the initiators. Greenscamming organizations are very active in organized climate denial . An important financier of greenscamming organizations was the oil company ExxonMobil, which over the years financially supported more than 100 climate denial organizations and spent about 20 million US dollars on greenscamming groups. In many of these organizations, James Lawrence Powell identified their "admirable" designations as the most striking common feature, which for the most part sounded very rational. He quotes a list of climate denial organizations drawn up by the Union of Concerned Scientists, which includes 43 organizations funded by Exxon. None had a name from which to infer climate change denial . The list is headed by Africa Fighting Malaria, whose website features articles and commentaries opposing ambitious climate mitigation concepts, even though the dangers of malaria could be exacerbated by global warming.
R
that it is very difficult to communicate open anti-environmental movements or initiatives to the public as positive
the difficultly of openly communicating the benefits of activities that damage the environment
D
for marketing departments
R
with the hypothetical name
called
D
in public
R
in view of the fact that surveys indicate
when surveys show
R
is
has
R
At the same time, however,
However,
D
the
D
scene, among others
R
rationalistic. In this context, he refers to
rational. He quotes
R
the Exxonoil company. None of these organizations
Exxon. None
R
derive their opposition to climate change
infer climate change denial
D
the organization