The WSJ has written eight editorials about the #ExxonKnew investigations, published five columns on it, and run another three op-eds. At sixteen pieces, they’ve covered this more heavily than they did the Paris Agreement (14), Keystone XL (12), or the manufactured controversy of Climategate, the biggest pseudo-win deniers have scored (13).
The Journal's focus, by and large, has been the freedom-of-speech question. They’ve been hesitant, to put it kindly, to address the issue at the heart of it: Did ExxonMobil commit fraud for funding groups to tell the public that climate change poses no threat, when they knew, according to their own researchers, that to be false?
In the first four editorials on the Exxon investigations, the word “fraud” was nowhere to be found, the message instead being outrage at this supposed suppression of First Amendment rights. In April and on June 16, it was mentioned in the context of New York Attorney General Eric Schniederman’s comments. The focus of both these pieces was the supposed attempt to shut down free speech, not the core issue of whether or not ExxonMobil’s potential fraud should be investigated.
But that blindness has now been lifted in the most recent editorial, courtesy of letters sent from thirteen GOP attorneys general to the 20 AGs considering or pursuing ExxxonMobil investigations. These letters allege that turnabout is fair play, and if ExxonMobil’s minimizing climate risk is cause for investigation, then perhaps clean energy companies (like Al Gore’s venture-capital firm) could be investigated for exaggerating climate risk as well.
[Continued after the jump!]
Comments are closed on this story.