Climate Global Warming Is Caused by Everything Our Interest Group Opposed Before It Came Along As An Issue

Many leftish groups have for years had a curious opposition to advertising.  Ralph Nader and his PIRG groups always made it a particular issue.  This always struck me as inherently insulting, as the "logic" behind their opposition to advertising is that people are all dumb, unthinking, programmable robots who launch off and buy whatever they see advertised on TV.

The global warming hysteria kind of sucks all the oxygen out of every other goofy leftish issue out there, so now its necessary to link your leftish cause to global warming.  So it is no surprise to find out that advertising apparently causes global warming:

AUSTRALIAN television advertising is producing as much as 57 tonnes of carbon dioxide per hour, and thirty second ad breaks are among the worst offenders, according to audit figures from pitch consultants TrinityP3.

Carbon emissions are particularly strong during high-rating programs such as the final episodes of the Ten Network’s Biggest Loser, which produced 2135kgs per 30 second ad, So You Think You Can Dance at 2061kg for every 30 seconds, closely followed by the Seven News 6pm news at 1689kg and Border Security at 1802kg.

TrinityP3 managing director Darren Woolley said emissions are calculated by measuring a broadcasters’ power consumption and that of a consumer watching an ad on television in their home, B&T Magazine reports.

“We look at the number of households and the number of TVs, and then the proportion of TVs that are plasma, LCD or traditional, and calculate energy consumption based on those factors,” Woolley said.

TrinityP3 is formalising a standard carbon footprint measurement of advertising, which it claims will be the first of its kind.

“Most companies have been obliged to think through their strategies on reducing carbon emissions and they need to remember that their marketing strategies do have an environmental impact that needs to be included. This is not something that is easily able to be measured,” Mr Woolley said.

“Reality television is interesting as the more viewers and voters that tune in, the higher the carbon footprint. The more people vote, the more it adds to the CO2 in the atmosphere.

Note that, oddly, the 54 minutes an hour of regular programming is OK, it’s only the 6 minutes of advertising that has a carbon footprint.  That’s OK, though, because I am going to start turning off the TV during advertisements and go out and sit in my idling SUV and listen to my commercial-free satellite radio instead.

  • John Galt

    If there was no advertising, people would buy less stuff. When people buy less stuff, we don’t produce as much stuff. With less manufacturing, less energy is consumed, ergo less carbon pollution is emitted.

    Therefore the government should seize all TV stations and broadcast all programs for free. Since people want to be entertained, the programming must include plenty of sex and violence. Instead of commercials, re-education public service announcements will be broadcast instead.

  • dreamin

    I am reminded of an observation made by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals:

    “Some people believe with great fervor preposterous things that just happen to coincide with their self-interest.”

  • verine2116

    PIRG has never taken a position against advertising. If you are so sure of it, please provide proof other than a rant.

  • JB

    Just when you think things can’t get any goofier…
    Next we will be calculating how having sex adds to global warming. Playing mood music for X amount of minutes, using the fireplace to create ambience, the batteries needed for, well, you know. And all that heavy breathing…we should all feel very guilty.

  • GLOBAL WARMING IS’NT CAUSED BY MAN, THATS ALREADY BEEN PROVEN BY 31,000 SCIENTISTS THAT WERE HIRED BY OUR PRESIDENT TO FIND OUT THE CAUSE. A SURVEY WAS TAKEN AND THE RESULTS BY ALL SCIENTISTS THAT ALL NON-SOLIDS DECIPATE WITHIN 500 FEET OF EARTH’S SURFACE. LAST YEAR CONGRESS ORDERED THE E.P.A. TO PROVE THAT NON-SOLIDS REACH THE OZONE, BUT I SENT THE E.P.A. AN EXPERIMENT THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO PROVE TO THEMSELVES THAT THE OZONE IS’NT AFFECTED BY ANYTHING FROM EARTH. AS IS MOST GOVERNMENTS ARE SENDING UNMANNED DRONES IN CERTAIN AREAS TO TRY AND FIND THE BEAMS SO WE CAN DELETE GLOBAL WARMING. THE SAME ENITY THATS CAUSING GLOBAL WARMING OWNS THAT PROBE OUTSIDE THE OZONE. IS IT YOUR? HAVE A NICE DAY. MIKE

  • http://www.socyberty.com/Activism/First-Step-for-the-Solution-to-Global-Warming.103109 And the definition is http://www.inventube.com/ooojay/view_blog/113/ ALSO http://www.inventube.com/ooojay/view_blog/114/ to help those that need this. WE NEED= ALL TO HELP FIND THE OTHER LOCATIONS FROM UNDERWATER, THE SECOND ENTRANCE AND WHO KNOWS BY MY EXPERIMENT, YOU’LL BE REPLENISHING YOUR BEACHES, COLLECTING TREASURIES FROM THE SANDS THAT MAN HAS NEVER TOUCHED SO CLOSE TO DRY LAND AND LOWERING THE OCEANS ALL AT THE SAME TIME. IF ALL NATIONS DID THIS EACH CONTINENT WOULD EXPAND INTO A BIGGER CONTINENT OF DRY LAND. HAVE A NICE DAY. MIKE