Re Australia, where the two biggest states have state elections coming up and energy costs is one of the issues.
cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/43895228
A total of 12 fossil fuel and anti-renewables groups spent $1.2 million on Meta ads specifically mentioning energy.
In response just six renewable energy companies and one lobby group put ads on Meta platforms, but they spent just 1 per cent of the amount that the 12 kicked in over the same period.
There’s tables in the article showing who is spending what on Facebook ads before the Vic and NSW state elections - Australian Energy Producers, Shell, and Minerals Council of Australia (including their astroturfing subsidiary Hands Off Our Fuel) are the biggest spenders.
I just laugh at them and point out how little energy I pay for
Why would anyone decent bankroll meta?
Unfortunately its a matter of media visibility. There are a lot of people reading Facebook/Instagram/Whatsapp/Threads and they vote. We have compulsory voting in Australia so Meta has potential to expose a lot of voters to pro-fossil-fuel propaganda without any alternative voices.
Another media example - the Australian TV Channel 7 (one of three commercial TV networks - 7, 9 and 10) is now part-owned by Australia’s richest person, heir to the Hancock mining empire, who doesn’t believe in climate change.. I would rather organizations not give them any money, but also I want people exposed to alternative perspectives instead of pro-mining-billionaire propaganda. They’ve been pushing anti-renewable crap as “news and current affairs” on Channel 7.
I get that no one wants to put money in the Zucks pocket… but there is a dirty game being played and the consequences of loosing are harsh.
