Those of us in the coal-to-energy industry are finally getting some media attention for our efforts to infuse some helpful, unbiased information into the election process.
The many millions of dollars' worth of advertising we're offering to the public free of charge will help set the record straight: coal smoke is not just clean but actually healthy; the coal industry--not the government--is best equipped to decide what constitutes healthy or unhealthy emissions; relying on "free" energy sources like solar or wind only makes Americans lazy and feeds a sense of energy-entitlement.
Scientists and so-called public health "experts" get plenty of free publicity through institutions like clinics, universities, the Centers for Disease Control, and hospitals. Those of us in the energy industry rarely complain that we are burdened with the high costs of advertising in order to offer our substantial health and environmental expertise to the public. It's a burden, however, that we're willing to shoulder.
We now humbly offer that burden--on your television, in your newspaper, on the radio--to the election process, and to you.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Your coal-industry's "expertise" is just like the tobacco-industry-funded health "expertise" that claimed that tobacco smoke is just fine for your lungs.
Your point is moot, anonymous.
Many of those scientists who worked for the tobacco industry have recognized their errors, abandoned their work for tobacco companies and now work for us. Obviously, since they've changed fields, they understand that their previous work was problematic.
If they still believed that tobacco smoke was good for you, they'd still be working for tobacco companies--not for us.
They're fighting the good fight now.
Post a Comment