Marking Up the Alberta Government's $30,000 Keystone XL Ad

authordefault
on

This is a guest post by Heather Libby.

If you’re a regular reader of the Sunday New York Times, you might have noticed a half-page ad in the A section promoting the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline last weekend. Paid for by the Alberta government with $30,000 of taxpayer funds, the text-heavy ad asserted several reasons why President Obama should approve the project.

Their primary argument? This is โ€œthe choice ofย reasonโ€.

Putting aside the fact that their word selection suggests those who oppose the pipeline are illogicalย or unreasonable; the ad says โ€œsome still argue Keystone should be decided on emotion rather than science and fact about Canada’s responsibly developed oil sandsย resourceโ€.

We completely agree. Here are a few scientific facts it forgot toย mention:

And the list goes on, full of reasonable concerns that the Alberta government would rather you not ponder.

Check out our copy of the ad below (click to embiggen) to see a few more suggested edits to Alberta’s assertions.ย 

authordefault

Related Posts

on

You might not have heard of them, but a new analysis shows these ad execs have overseen $1.5 billion worth of fossil fuel ads in the U.S. since the Paris Agreement.

You might not have heard of them, but a new analysis shows these ad execs have overseen $1.5 billion worth of fossil fuel ads in the U.S. since the Paris Agreement.
on

DeSmog analysis reveals London-based WPP linked to twiceย as much oil advertising as American rivalsย despite its internal climate policy.

DeSmog analysis reveals London-based WPP linked to twiceย as much oil advertising as American rivalsย despite its internal climate policy.
on

Gas turbine manufacturers are confident they will win the battle over whether Europeโ€™s AI boom will be powered by fossil fuels.

Gas turbine manufacturers are confident they will win the battle over whether Europeโ€™s AI boom will be powered by fossil fuels.
Analysis
on

The premier is tossing aside the constituents who voted for her to grant favours to tech and fossil fuel executives.

The premier is tossing aside the constituents who voted for her to grant favours to tech and fossil fuel executives.