Coal Giant Peabody Energy Denies Social Media Poverty Campaign Is Bogus

authordefault
on

On the fringes of Brisbaneโ€™s G20 summit inside the Queensland capitalโ€™s grand city hall, Peabody Energy president Glenn Kellow made a remarkableย claim.

Almost half a million people in countries across the globe had supported his coal companyโ€™s PR campaign to urge the world to act on โ€œenergy povertyโ€, claimedย Kellow.ย 

Kellow was referring to the companyโ€™s โ€œLights Onโ€ project run under his firmโ€™s Advanced Energy for Life (AEfL) campaign.

The AEfL campaign was created with the help of Burson-Marsteller, one of the worldโ€™s biggest PR firms and a specialist in crisisย communications.ย 

In a press release, Peabody Energyย again claimed about โ€œhalf-million citizens from 48 nationsโ€ had โ€œurged G20 leadersโ€ to have a greater focus on energy poverty through itsย campaign.ย 

Peabody Energy,ย the world’s biggest privately owned coal company,ย has been the leading voice in the coal industryโ€™s attempts to hijack the term โ€œenergy povertyโ€ for its ownย ends.

While international agencies including the United Nations World Health Organization and the International Energy Agency agree that more people should have access to electricity and cleaner energy, they also urge action to reduce fossil fuelย emissions.

The IEA says there are about 1.3 billion people in the world without adequate access to electricity, the majority of which live in sub-Saharan Africa andย Asia.

Peabody Energy and other coal industry figures have latched onto the issue to claim the only way to bring the poor out of poverty is to give them access to โ€œcheapโ€ power from theirย coal.ย 

The โ€œLights Onโ€ project appears to be little more than a name attached to some images and a video posted on the companyโ€™s website and social mediaย channels.

But how did Peabody Energy manage to persuade so many people in so many countries to support a campaign with such an obvious corporateย self-interest?

Did they get half a million answers on a survey?ย  Did they run a giant petitionย project?ย 

No.ย 

A Peabody Energy spokesperson told DeSmogBlog that โ€œthose supporting the Lights On Project have liked our campaign on our social media channelsโ€ adding that โ€œBurson is not involved in our social media campaign, though they and other firms have assisted us with elements of the AEFLย campaign.โ€ย 

Now questions are being asked about the legitimacy of the companyโ€™s campaign with accusations the firm paid online agencies so that people would โ€œlikeโ€ their campaign โ€” an accusation Peabody Energy nowย denies.ย 

On EcoWatch, DeSmogBlog contributor Kevin Grandia wrote that Peabodyโ€™s campaign looked suspiciously like the roll out of a โ€œpay-per-careโ€ strategy. Heย wrote:ย 

With pay-per-care, companies can buy large volumes of โ€œlikesโ€ and followers and quickly manufacture the appearance of a worldwide outpouring of support for the product or idea they are trying to sell. Companies pay to make it look like peopleย care.

Grandia pointed out that the AEfL Facebook page contained many highly critical comments and what appeared to beย spam.

Climate campaign group TckTckTck has published an analysis of the AEfL Facebook and Twitter accounts.

The group found that both social media channels had seen sudden jumps inย followers.

Companies buying likes or twitter followers to create the perception that they or their products are popular is a common, if useless and potentially embarrassing, practice. However, the huge numbers of followers Peabody has gained appear to be bought to give the AEfL campaign credibility for lobbying, and provide the company social license to talk about poverty issues to sellย coal.

Peabodyโ€™s campaign has already been criticised by UK advertising watchdogs for the โ€œmisleadingโ€ use of the phrase โ€œclean coalโ€ which the authority said could lead readers to think coal was free fromย emissions.

So did Peabody Energy actually pay for people to โ€œlikeโ€ its online campaign so that it could claim to have half a millionย supporters?

Peabody Energy spokesperson Beth Sutton said โ€œnoโ€, tellingย DeSmogBlog its campaign was not โ€œbogusโ€ and the claims of โ€œactivist campaignersโ€ were โ€œridiculous and untrueโ€. Suttonย said:

It appears they are working hard to create controversy where none exists in an effort to stop a discussion that they donโ€™t agreeย with.

The success of the campaign demonstrates that there are many like-minded advocates in dozens of nations who want to find policy solutions to alleviate energyย poverty.

Peabody directs our social platforms. We work with a variety of firms on our Advanced Energy For Lifeย Campaign.

Peabody Energy also placed a post on its AEfL Facebook page.

Activists questioning our #LightsOn project are misguided & working to create controversy to distract from real issues. Thanks to all of our followers for expressing the need to raise awareness and support to end energyย poverty.

On Twitter, the firmย said:

Activists questioning our #LightsOn project are misguided & working to create controversy to distract from realย issues.

One Facebook user responded โ€œno one wants coalย anymoreโ€.

Facebook user Catherine Phillips wrote: โ€œHi, we just like Your page, get 20 likes for FREE. S O C L I K E S C O Mโ€, but this comment has since beenย deleted.

Similar examples can be found in response to Peabody’s tweet as well, such as:ย 

Another recent AEfL post garnered more than 3,000 Likes but a glance through the comments shows little actual support.

ย 
Screen capture by Brendan DeMelle of 7 November AEfL Facebookย post.

While Peabody staff appear to be monitoring these social media channels and deleting spam and gibberish more regularly now, the number of Likes still doesn’t seem to correspond to a large number of substantive comments supporting the coal giant’s campaign to sell more coal to alleviate energyย poverty.

You have to wonder how sincere the support reallyย is.

Main image credit:ย TckTckTck

Related Posts

on

The new leader of the opposition has regularly criticised the UKโ€™s green ambitions.

The new leader of the opposition has regularly criticised the UKโ€™s green ambitions.
on

Lucy von Sturmer and Duncan Meisel are building communities of creatives dedicated to preventing the advertising and public relations industry from casting polluters as climate saviours.

Lucy von Sturmer and Duncan Meisel are building communities of creatives dedicated to preventing the advertising and public relations industry from casting polluters as climate saviours.
Opinion
on

It's time to come together to collectively work through the anxiety, grief and overwhelm so many of us are experiencing.

It's time to come together to collectively work through the anxiety, grief and overwhelm so many of us are experiencing.
on

UCP pledges to abandon the provinceโ€™s net zero targets, and remove the designation of CO2 as a pollutant.

UCP pledges to abandon the provinceโ€™s net zero targets, and remove the designation of CO2 as a pollutant.