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

authordefault
onMar 24, 2013 @ 07:48 PDT

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

Analysis
onDec 2, 2025 @ 07:48 PST

By tying the projectโ€™s fate to Indigenous โ€œequity,โ€ Carney saddles groups with the blame, and potentially the bill, if they move to stop a pipeline they oppose.

By tying the projectโ€™s fate to Indigenous โ€œequity,โ€ Carney saddles groups with the blame, and potentially the bill, if they move to stop a pipeline they oppose.
onNov 28, 2025 @ 03:02 PST

The Labour peer called for new coal power in the Global Warming Policy Foundationโ€™s annual lecture.

The Labour peer called for new coal power in the Global Warming Policy Foundationโ€™s annual lecture.
Opinion
onNov 27, 2025 @ 06:38 PST

Blunt communication is our firewall.

Blunt communication is our firewall.
onNov 25, 2025 @ 22:00 PST

The programme is โ€œyet another bung to industrial productionโ€, experts say.

The programme is โ€œyet another bung to industrial productionโ€, experts say.