Gillis, Justin and Krauss, Clifford. “Exxon Mobil Investigated for Possible Climate Change Lies by New York Attorney General.” The New York Times. November 5, 2015. The article discussed the recent investigation on Exxon Mobil by The New York Attorney General’s Office.
Where do the authors work, and what are their areas of expertise? Note any other publications by the authors with relevance to the 6Cities project.
One of the authors, Justin Gillis, writes for the science section of the New York Times, which seems to be his area of expertise. The other author, Clifford Krauss, has been a correspondent for the New York Times since 1990. He has written articles for The New York Times on the immediate cause of record-breaking warmth as an El Nino pattern, the pledges to battle climate change, global companies joining climate change efforts, Antartica ice melts based on burning of fossil fuels, and many more articles on environmental pollution and its impact. Currently, he is a national business correspondent, based in Houston, covering energy. He has published articles in Foreign Affairs, GQ and Wilson Quarterly, along with other publications.
What are the main findings or arguments presented in the article or report?
The main point of the report is that The New York Attorney General’s Office has launched an investigation on Exxon Mobil. The investigation is questioning whether or not Exxon Mobil disclosed the business risks of climate change as soon as it understood them. The issue is, though Exxon Mobil has disclosed risks in recent years, the information may have not been as sufficient and truthful as it should have been. In the article, a comparison is made between the impact of oil companies on the environment and people and that of tobacco companies. The claim is that these two issues are proving to be more similar than most people would like.
Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported.
-The Smithsonian Researcher discussed in the article, who published papers questioning established climate sciences and received “extensive funds” from fossil fuel companies, including Exxon Mobil. -Exxon Mobil’s planning for activities, like drilling, in the Arctic, despite of the fact that it was aware of the risks of climate change and had funded groups in the 1990s to deny climate risks. -As stated by Mr. Cohen of Exxon Mobil, they had the goal of keeping the United States out of global climate treaty, Kyoto Protocol, which may have acted as an incentive for Exxon Mobil to lie about the risks of climate change.
What three (or more) quotes capture the message of the article or report?
“Attorneys general for other states could join in Mr. Schneiderman’s efforts, bringing far greater investigative and legal resources to bear on the issue. Some experts see the potential for a legal assault on fossil fuel companies similar to the lawsuits against tobacco companies in recent decades, which cost those companies tens of billions of dollars in penalties.”
“News reporting in the last eight months added impetus to the investigation, they said. In February, several news organizations, including The New York Times,reported that a Smithsonian researcher who had published papers questioning established climate science, Wei-Hock Soon, had received extensive funds from fossil fuel companies, including Exxon Mobil, without disclosing them. That struck some experts as similar to the activities of tobacco companies.”
“Exxon Mobil has been disclosing such risks in recent years, but whether those disclosures were sufficient has been a matter of public debate.”
“Last year, for example, the company warned investors of intensifying efforts by governments to limit emissions. ‘These requirements could make our products more expensive, lengthen project implementation times and reduce demand for hydrocarbons, as well as shift hydrocarbon demand toward relatively lower-carbon sources such as natural gas,’ the company said at the time. But in another recent report, Exxon Mobil essentially ruled out the possibility that governments would adopt climate policies stringent enough to force it to leave its reserves in the ground, saying that rising population and global energy demand would prevent that. “Meeting these needs will require all economic energy sources, especially oil and natural gas,” it said.”
What were the methods, tools and/or data used to produce the claims or arguments made in the article or report?
The claims made in the article were based on the recent subpoena issued by New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman, the extensive funds paid to Smithsonian Researcher by fossil fuel companies, including Exxon Mobil, and the possibility that Exxon Mobil did not in fact disclose the risks of climate change.
How (if at all) are health disparities or other equity issues addressed in the article or report?
The health disparity issue discussed in the article is with regards to who actually gets to know and understand the impact of big companies on their lives. Fossil fuel companies, and in this case, Exxon Mobil, have a lot of money and unfortunately, can pay off researchers that could potentially point out a prominent flaw in a company's work that the public deserves to know about. In this case, like many other cases, the money of these companies gets to control what research is done on their company, as well as what information is disclosed to the public.
Where has this article or report been referenced or discussed? (In some journals, you can see this in a sidebar.)
Can you learn anything from the article or report’s bibliography that tells us something about how the article or report was produced?
What three points, details or references from the text did you follow up on to advance your understanding of how air pollution science has been produced and used in governance and education in different settings?
I followed up on related New York Times coverage for this article and found three interesting articles annotate: -More Oil Companies Could Join Exxon Mobil as Focus of Climate Investigations -Exxon Inquiry Both Mirrors and Contrasts With Tobacco Industry Case -Exxon Mobil Accused of Misleading Public on Climate Change Risks
- Full citation and abstract?
Gillis, Justin and Krauss, Clifford. “Exxon Mobil Investigated for Possible Climate Change Lies by New York Attorney General.” The New York Times. November 5, 2015.The article discussed the recent investigation on Exxon Mobil by The New York Attorney General’s Office.
- Where do the authors work, and what are their areas of expertise? Note any other publications by the authors with relevance to the 6Cities project.
One of the authors, Justin Gillis, writes for the science section of the New York Times, which seems to be his area of expertise. The other author, Clifford Krauss, has been a correspondent for the New York Times since 1990. He has written articles for The New York Times on the immediate cause of record-breaking warmth as an El Nino pattern, the pledges to battle climate change, global companies joining climate change efforts, Antartica ice melts based on burning of fossil fuels, and many more articles on environmental pollution and its impact. Currently, he is a national business correspondent, based in Houston, covering energy. He has published articles in Foreign Affairs, GQ and Wilson Quarterly, along with other publications.- What are the main findings or arguments presented in the article or report?
The main point of the report is that The New York Attorney General’s Office has launched an investigation on Exxon Mobil. The investigation is questioning whether or not Exxon Mobil disclosed the business risks of climate change as soon as it understood them. The issue is, though Exxon Mobil has disclosed risks in recent years, the information may have not been as sufficient and truthful as it should have been.In the article, a comparison is made between the impact of oil companies on the environment and people and that of tobacco companies. The claim is that these two issues are proving to be more similar than most people would like.
- Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported.
-The Smithsonian Researcher discussed in the article, who published papers questioning established climate sciences and received “extensive funds” from fossil fuel companies, including Exxon Mobil.-Exxon Mobil’s planning for activities, like drilling, in the Arctic, despite of the fact that it was aware of the risks of climate change and had funded groups in the 1990s to deny climate risks.
-As stated by Mr. Cohen of Exxon Mobil, they had the goal of keeping the United States out of global climate treaty, Kyoto Protocol, which may have acted as an incentive for Exxon Mobil to lie about the risks of climate change.
- What three (or more) quotes capture the message of the article or report?
“Attorneys general for other states could join in Mr. Schneiderman’s efforts, bringing far greater investigative and legal resources to bear on the issue. Some experts see the potential for a legal assault on fossil fuel companies similar to the lawsuits against tobacco companies in recent decades, which cost those companies tens of billions of dollars in penalties.”“News reporting in the last eight months added impetus to the investigation, they said. In February, several news organizations, including The New York Times,reported that a Smithsonian researcher who had published papers questioning established climate science, Wei-Hock Soon, had received extensive funds from fossil fuel companies, including Exxon Mobil, without disclosing them. That struck some experts as similar to the activities of tobacco companies.”
“Exxon Mobil has been disclosing such risks in recent years, but whether those disclosures were sufficient has been a matter of public debate.”
“Last year, for example, the company warned investors of intensifying efforts by governments to limit emissions. ‘These requirements could make our products more expensive, lengthen project implementation times and reduce demand for hydrocarbons, as well as shift hydrocarbon demand toward relatively lower-carbon sources such as natural gas,’ the company said at the time. But in another recent report, Exxon Mobil essentially ruled out the possibility that governments would adopt climate policies stringent enough to force it to leave its reserves in the ground, saying that rising population and global energy demand would prevent that. “Meeting these needs will require all economic energy sources, especially oil and natural gas,” it said.”
- What were the methods, tools and/or data used to produce the claims or arguments made in the article or report?
The claims made in the article were based on the recent subpoena issued by New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman, the extensive funds paid to Smithsonian Researcher by fossil fuel companies, including Exxon Mobil, and the possibility that Exxon Mobil did not in fact disclose the risks of climate change.- How (if at all) are health disparities or other equity issues addressed in the article or report?
The health disparity issue discussed in the article is with regards to who actually gets to know and understand the impact of big companies on their lives. Fossil fuel companies, and in this case, Exxon Mobil, have a lot of money and unfortunately, can pay off researchers that could potentially point out a prominent flaw in a company's work that the public deserves to know about. In this case, like many other cases, the money of these companies gets to control what research is done on their company, as well as what information is disclosed to the public.- What three points, details or references from the text did you follow up on to advance your understanding of how air pollution science has been produced and used in governance and education in different settings?
I followed up on related New York Times coverage for this article and found three interesting articles annotate:-More Oil Companies Could Join Exxon Mobil as Focus of Climate Investigations
-Exxon Inquiry Both Mirrors and Contrasts With Tobacco Industry Case
-Exxon Mobil Accused of Misleading Public on Climate Change Risks