A devastating hurricane, an oil company, and an investigative journalist. It sounds like the ingredients of a thriller, but it's the reality of modern journalism. Chevron's decision to sponsor climate news in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene has sparked a heated debate about the ethics of reporting. Are we facing a case of greenwashing or a new form of support for quality journalism?
The line between information and advertising is becoming increasingly blurred, calling into question the fundamental principles of the profession. In an age where truth is more necessary than ever, how can we ensure that journalism remains a bulwark against disinformation?
The day after the storm
On October 3, 2024, as Hurricane Helene dissipated, leaving a trail of destruction in its wake, a newsletter from the US newspaper Politico published an article on the terrifying implications of climate disasters. The title was telling: “Nowhere is Safe from Climate Disasters.” But there was a detail that many did not miss: the article was “presented by Chevron.” And it is not an isolated case: the oil giant has already placed ads in the New York Times during Climate Week, which was held in the Big Apple, and has sponsored the climate newsletter of Axios. A massive media campaign that raises questions about the relationship between journalism and big corporations.
The juxtaposition of dramatic news about the effects of climate change and the sponsorship of one of the world's largest oil companies has sparked a wave of reactions. On social media, journalists and activists have cried foul. But what really lies behind this controversial editorial choice?
Anchor, “green drilling” is born
At the centre of the hurricane (this time media-related) is the Anchor project by Chevron, an ultra-high-pressure offshore drilling initiative that the company is promoting with great “passion” as a “low-carbon” solution. What is it?
The Anchor project provides low-carbon oil and natural gas to help meet energy demands.
Bruce Niemeyer, president of Chevron's U.S. oil exploration and production, in a press release.
Located 225 kilometers off the coast of Louisiana, Anchor represents an impressive technological achievement. For the first time, an oil company It has succeeded in drilling in deep-sea environments with pressures of up to 1406 kg per square centimetre, a third more than any previous well.
The company estimates Chevron estimates that Anchor could produce up to 440 million barrels of oil over 30 years, or the same amount of emissions of 499 methane gas plants in one year. But these millions of barrels are just the beginning of the company’s ambitions; Chevron hopes Anchor will pioneer a new type of “green” oil production that could produce billions of gallons of oil and gas from ultrahigh-pressure fields around the world.
The Thin Line Between Information and Advertising and the Risks Hidden Behind Green Rhetoric
While Chevron promotes Anchor as a “safe” and “low-carbon” project, experts raise significant concerns. As noted, the project is drilling at pressures one-third higher than Deepwater Horizon1, the responsible platform of one of the worst environmental disasters in history.
Kristen Monsell, Oceans Legal Director and Senior Attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, harshly criticized the project:
There is no way to make offshore drilling safe, especially not projects like this that involve drilling at such depths and under such high pressures. And the further offshore oil and gas operations go, the more difficult it becomes to respond to oil spills or other accidents, as the Deepwater Horizon disaster illustrates all too well.
The Future of Climate News and Climate Journalism
How can the media maintain their integrity if they are financially dependent on companies that may have interests that conflict with objective reporting? And mind you, it's not just an American problem. In Europe, if anything, it's even more subtle, because it hasn't fully emerged yet.
There is no simple answer to this question, but it is clear that journalism in the era of post-truth and various “washings” greens, pink, black and rainbow he finds himself at yet another crossroads. On one side, there is a need to find sustainable business models in an era of crisis for traditional media. On the other, there is an ethical imperative to provide accurate and unbiased information2 on one of the most pressing challenges of our time. Rhetorically, but transparently, I ask you: which of the two needs is succumbing, in your opinion?
Climate News: A Call to Action Not Just for Readers
Journalists, readers and citizens, we all have a crucial role to play in this challenge. We must be more active and more vigilant than ever, critically examining not only the content of the news, but also the funding sources of the media we consume. Supporting independent journalism, through subscriptions or donations, can make a difference.
At the same time, we must demand transparency from news organizations. Sponsorships must occupy non-prominent spaces in the information offering. They must be “in the next room,” in a defined space, or allow readers to evaluate potential conflicts of interest.
Climate journalism is too important to be compromised by commercial interests. In an age of climate crisis and rampant misinformation, when even the debunking becomes a form of manipulation, we need more than ever free, courageous and truthful information, especially when it comes to climate news. The future of our planet could depend on it.
- The Deepwater Horizon disaster was an explosion and subsequent oil spill that occurred on April 20, 2010 in the Gulf of Mexico. It resulted in the deaths of 11 people and the spill of 4,9 million barrels of oil. ↩︎
- Here I feel like advising you Heated, the precious environmental newsletter that has raised the problem more and better than others. Read it, and if you like, support it. ↩︎