Assessing ExxonMobil’s climate change communications (1977–2014)

This paper assesses whether ExxonMobil Corporation has in the past misled the general public about climate change. We present an empirical document-by-document textual content analysis and comparison of 187 climate change communications from ExxonMobil, including peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Geoffrey Supran, Naomi Oreskes
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: IOP Publishing 2017-01-01
Series:Environmental Research Letters
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa815f
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1832576137317842944
author Geoffrey Supran
Naomi Oreskes
author_facet Geoffrey Supran
Naomi Oreskes
author_sort Geoffrey Supran
collection DOAJ
description This paper assesses whether ExxonMobil Corporation has in the past misled the general public about climate change. We present an empirical document-by-document textual content analysis and comparison of 187 climate change communications from ExxonMobil, including peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed publications, internal company documents, and paid, editorial-style advertisements (‘advertorials’) in The New York Times . We examine whether these communications sent consistent messages about the state of climate science and its implications—specifically, we compare their positions on climate change as real, human-caused, serious, and solvable. In all four cases, we find that as documents become more publicly accessible, they increasingly communicate doubt. This discrepancy is most pronounced between advertorials and all other documents. For example, accounting for expressions of reasonable doubt, 83% of peer-reviewed papers and 80% of internal documents acknowledge that climate change is real and human-caused, yet only 12% of advertorials do so, with 81% instead expressing doubt. We conclude that ExxonMobil contributed to advancing climate science—by way of its scientists’ academic publications—but promoted doubt about it in advertorials. Given this discrepancy, we conclude that ExxonMobil misled the public. Our content analysis also examines ExxonMobil’s discussion of the risks of stranded fossil fuel assets. We find the topic discussed and sometimes quantified in 24 documents of various types, but absent from advertorials. Finally, based on the available documents, we outline ExxonMobil’s strategic approach to climate change research and communication, which helps to contextualize our findings.
format Article
id doaj-art-841ab9cb7b9b441f83efab6e70f3ac1d
institution Kabale University
issn 1748-9326
language English
publishDate 2017-01-01
publisher IOP Publishing
record_format Article
series Environmental Research Letters
spelling doaj-art-841ab9cb7b9b441f83efab6e70f3ac1d2025-01-31T10:39:24ZengIOP PublishingEnvironmental Research Letters1748-93262017-01-0112808401910.1088/1748-9326/aa815fAssessing ExxonMobil’s climate change communications (1977–2014)Geoffrey Supran0Naomi OreskesAuthor to whom any correspondence should be addressed.This paper assesses whether ExxonMobil Corporation has in the past misled the general public about climate change. We present an empirical document-by-document textual content analysis and comparison of 187 climate change communications from ExxonMobil, including peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed publications, internal company documents, and paid, editorial-style advertisements (‘advertorials’) in The New York Times . We examine whether these communications sent consistent messages about the state of climate science and its implications—specifically, we compare their positions on climate change as real, human-caused, serious, and solvable. In all four cases, we find that as documents become more publicly accessible, they increasingly communicate doubt. This discrepancy is most pronounced between advertorials and all other documents. For example, accounting for expressions of reasonable doubt, 83% of peer-reviewed papers and 80% of internal documents acknowledge that climate change is real and human-caused, yet only 12% of advertorials do so, with 81% instead expressing doubt. We conclude that ExxonMobil contributed to advancing climate science—by way of its scientists’ academic publications—but promoted doubt about it in advertorials. Given this discrepancy, we conclude that ExxonMobil misled the public. Our content analysis also examines ExxonMobil’s discussion of the risks of stranded fossil fuel assets. We find the topic discussed and sometimes quantified in 24 documents of various types, but absent from advertorials. Finally, based on the available documents, we outline ExxonMobil’s strategic approach to climate change research and communication, which helps to contextualize our findings.https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa815fanthropogenic global warmingclimate changeExxonMobildisinformationcontent analysisclimate communication
spellingShingle Geoffrey Supran
Naomi Oreskes
Assessing ExxonMobil’s climate change communications (1977–2014)
Environmental Research Letters
anthropogenic global warming
climate change
ExxonMobil
disinformation
content analysis
climate communication
title Assessing ExxonMobil’s climate change communications (1977–2014)
title_full Assessing ExxonMobil’s climate change communications (1977–2014)
title_fullStr Assessing ExxonMobil’s climate change communications (1977–2014)
title_full_unstemmed Assessing ExxonMobil’s climate change communications (1977–2014)
title_short Assessing ExxonMobil’s climate change communications (1977–2014)
title_sort assessing exxonmobil s climate change communications 1977 2014
topic anthropogenic global warming
climate change
ExxonMobil
disinformation
content analysis
climate communication
url https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa815f
work_keys_str_mv AT geoffreysupran assessingexxonmobilsclimatechangecommunications19772014
AT naomioreskes assessingexxonmobilsclimatechangecommunications19772014