EPA Paid Weather Channel for Videos

[Rose Siding]

The Environmental Protection Agency paid the Weather Channel $40,000 to produce and broadcast several videos about ozone depletion, urban heat problems and the dangers of ultraviolet radiation as part of the Bush administration's efforts to inform the public about climate change, agency records show.
....
The Weather Channel "is in a unique position to help EPA expand its audience," an EPA official wrote in a document justifying the sole-source agreement. "It is the only channel that focuses its programming solely on weather and environmentally-related information. Broadcasting to more than 80 million households and 95 percent of all cable TV homes in the U.S., the weather channel has established itself as the strongest electronic-media brand among all 24-hour news and information channels."

Two experts who reviewed the videos at the request of The Washington Post said the content is straightforward, educational and scientifically sound.

But the EPA's payments to a commercial news organization to further its public relations efforts reinforce recent concerns that the administration sometimes has cloaked its promotion of executive branch policies in messages that resemble news stories and do not always fully disclose the government's role. It also raises questions about whether Americans can trust that the information they receive from news outlets such as the Weather Channel has been independently reported and presented.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/17/AR2005071700892.html

[UpInArms]

1. this activity reminded me of this article

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/17/opinion/17kristof.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fColumnists%2fNicholas%20D%20Kristof&oref=login

{free registration or try www.bugmenot.com)

excerpt:

Every subway car carries those same two portraits as well, and every adult wears a button depicting the Great Leader. And every home (or village, in rural areas) has an audio speaker, which starts broadcasting propaganda at 6 each morning to tell people how lucky they are.

...more...

[wli]

2. Sounds like the Shrub's next move.

About all we're missing is the buttons.

[CoffeeCat]

3. The Weather Channel? What's next?

Will the Neocons take over Iron Chef--and only cook animals that are listed on the Endangered Species list--to demonstrate that these animals really are plentiful, and tasty too!

What about Trading Spaces--Will they tear down the homes of liberal, hippie, peace nicks and rebuild them into high-end, multi-million-dollar properties for rich neocons?

I can't wait to see what these fascists do to Sesame Street!

[oscar111]

4. Weather Channel is stupid all thru the day. Agreed?

i am annoyed at the lack of detail in the WC's usual presentation of the weather.

seems intentionally stupid.

anyone else annoyed and notice the lack of detail?

seems geared to grade school kids.

[CoffeeCat]

8. The average American reads at a 5th grade level...

...so I guess that makes sense.

[shawmut]

9. It ain't what it used to be

that's for sure.


It sucks. TWC was the one channel I could watch on TV that didn't give me a headache.

[SoCalDem]

5. There's a near category-5 headed to Mexico, and

I clicked on the weather channel to hear about it.. Were there serious-faced people explaining where they thought it might land, and when?? Nope.. They were showing for about the 5th time today.. canned clips from hurricanes from the past.. what a bunch of foxy-cnn-anites:puke:

[GoddessOfGuinness]

6. Yes! Particularly since

this little piece of news: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/epaper/2005/04/21/m1a_wx_0421.html

[dbt]

10. And THEN, there's a bill pending to establish Weather CONTROL.

Kay Hutchison (R-Texas) introduced S.517 on March 3 of this year. Couple this with Santorum's bid to choke off the National Weather Service and you've got a real :wtf:

[gbwarming]

7. This sounds ok to me. I'd complain if they were pushing CLEAR SKIES, but

These push sunscreen, explanations of urban heat islands and the problems of stormwater runoff. They have text notices at the end that identify the EPA as co-producers. The science is based on facts!! Sounds like a Clinton era effort the the Bush* administration didn't manage to kill.

This is totally different than paying Armstrong Williams, et al to shill without any disclosure.

Check it out: http://epa.gov/weatherchannel/

[WhiteTara]

18. the problem is that NOAA is where

the weather channel gets its info. chimpy just wants to make sure that we are stupid stupider and stupedest. Let's all watch storm stories and get scared.

[krkaufman]

11. I don't have a problem w/ paying for content...

... rather, I have a problem w/ forcing content. So long as the content is "scientifically valid", I don't see a problem w/ paying someone else to produce the material.

[Rose Siding]

12. What oversight is there of the content?

Once a company becomes dependent on revenue from a client -in this case the govt- that client gains power over the company.

The reality is that with a one party government, there is no oversight.

[toopers]

13. I don't think we have to worry about TWC being dependent . . .

on the govt. revenue ($40k). They make more money off a days worth of internet ads and click thrus. If $40k was substantial to TWC then TWC would not be in business.

[krkaufman]

16. Sure, the Weather Channel shouldn't be the sole source...

... of materials. Plus, a process would need to be in place to validate the science behind the reports.

[SoCalDem]

15. Never fear, Ricky & Kay probably have a few "scientists"

all lined up to provide the "public science" that will go along with the subscription 'service'..

It amazes me how utterly controlling these freaks are.. they won't quit until we have to all ask permission to go to the bathroom:)

[Supersedeas]

14. its the close connections bt the Media and the Neo-Cons stupid

[Psephos]

17. I read the article; don't see any problem here n/t