Wikipedia - Benutzerbeiträge [de]

Merchants of Doubt

2010-12-22T20:51:49Z

Wikispan: People who are criticised in the book can have their say. But neutral reviews come first.

{{Infobox book
| name = Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming
| image = [[Image:Merchants of DOUBT.jpg|197px]]
| image_caption =
| author = [[Naomi Oreskes]], [[Erik M. Conway]]
| illustrator =
| cover_artist =
| country =
| series =
| subject = Scientists—Professional Ethics Science news—Moral and ethical aspects
| publisher = [[Bloomsbury Press]]
| pub_date = 2010
| media_type =
| pages = 355 pp.
| isbn = 978-1-59691-610-4
| oclc = 461631066
| dewey = 174.95
| congress = Q147 .O74 2010
}}
'''''Merchants of Doubt''''' is a 2010 book by the American [[History of science|science historians]] [[Naomi Oreskes]] and [[Erik M. Conway]]. It identifies parallels between the [[climate change debate]] and earlier controversies over [[tobacco smoking]], [[acid rain]] and the [[ozone hole|hole in the ozone layer]]. Oreskes and Conway wrote that spreading doubt and confusion was the basic strategy of those opposing action in each case.<ref name = stek/> In particular, [[Fred Seitz]], [[Fred Singer]], and a few other contrarian scientists joined forces with conservative [[think tank]]s and private corporations to challenge the scientific consensus on many contemporary issues.<ref>{{cite book |first1=Naomi |last1=Oreskes |first2=Erik M. |last2=Conway |title=Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=fpMh3nh3JI0C&pg=PP4 |year=2010 |publisher=Bloomsbury Press |isbn=9781596916104 |page=6 |ref=harv}} [http://www.merchantsofdoubt.org/index.html merchantsofdoubt.org]</ref>

The [[Marshall Institute]] and Fred Singer have been critical of the book, but most other reviewers received it favorably. One reviewer said that ''Merchants of Doubt'' is exhaustively researched and documented, and may be one of the most important books of 2010. Another reviewer saw the book as his choice for best science book of the year.<ref name=Mckie8/>

==Themes==
Oreskes ([[University of California, San Diego]]) and Conway (NASA’s [[Jet Propulsion Laboratory]]) trace the ways in which a handful of [[Conservatism in the United States|politically conservative]] scientists, with strong ties to particular industries, have "played a disproportionate role in debates about controversial questions".<ref name=pk/> These scientists have challenged the [[scientific consensus]] about the dangers of cigarette smoking, the effects of acid rain, the existence of the ozone hole, and the existence of [[anthropogenic climate change]].<ref name=pk/> This has resulted in "deliberate obfuscation" of the issues which has had an influence on public opinion and policy-making.<ref name=pk/> Oreskes and Conway reach the conclusion that:
<blockquote>
There are many reasons why the United States has failed to act on [[global warming]], but at least one is the confusion raised by [[William Nierenberg|Bill Nierenberg]], [[Fred Seitz]], and [[Fred Singer]].<ref name=pk>{{cite journal |author=Kitcher, Philip |authorlink=Philip Kitcher |title=The Climate Change Debates |journal=Science |volume=328 |issue=5983 |pages=1231–2 |date=June 4, 2010 |doi=10.1126/science.1189312 |url=http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/328/5983/1230-a }}</ref><ref>[[Clive Hamilton]] reaches a similar conclusion in his book ''[[Requiem for a Species]]'' (2010, pp. 98–103). Hamilton suggests that the roots of [[climate change denial]] lie in the reaction of American conservatism to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. He argues that as the "red menace" receded, conservatives who had put energy into opposing communism sought other outlets. Hamilton contends that the conservative backlash against climate science was led by three prominent physicists — [[Frederick Seitz]], [[Robert Jastrow]], and [[William Nierenberg]].</ref>
</blockquote>
All physicists, Singer was a rocket scientist, whereas Nierenberg and Seitz worked on the atomic bomb.<ref name=sb>Brown, Seth (May 31, 2010). [http://www.usatoday.com/money/books/reviews/2010-06-01-deathmerchants01_ST_N.htm 'Merchants of Doubt' delves into contrarian scientists] ''USA Today''.</ref> One reviewer of the book states that some "climate sceptics are recycled critics of controls on tobacco and acid rain".<ref>Sachs, Jeffrey (February 19, 2010). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/cif-green/2010/feb/19/climate-change-sceptics-science Climate sceptics are recycled critics of controls on tobacco and acid rain] ''The Guardian''.</ref> As Oreskes and Conway state: "small numbers of people can have large, negative impacts, especially if they are organised, determined and have access to power".<ref name=rm>McKie, Robin (August 1, 2010). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/01/climate-change-robin-mckie "A dark ideology is driving those who deny climate change".] "The Observer", ''The Guardian''.</ref>

==Seitz and Singer==
Seitz and Singer had served in high levels of science administration, and had contact with admirals, generals, and even presidents. They also had considerable media experience, so they could obtain press coverage for their views. The book says, "They used their scientific credentials to present themselves as authorities, and they used their authority to discredit any science they didn't like".<ref name=oc2010>{{harvnb|Oreskes|Conway|2010|p=8}}</ref>

Seitz and Singer were seen to be contrarians in the tobacco debate. Seitz directed a program for the [[R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company]] that funded research defending tobacco. Singer co-wrote a report debunking the risks of second-hand smoke, funded by the [[Tobacco Institute]], which attacked the science behind the finding that there were health risks from passive smoking and argued that it was "part of a political agenda to expand government control over peoples lives".<ref name = stek>Steketee, Mike (November 20, 2010). [http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/some-sceptics-make-it-a-habit-to-be-wrong/story-fn59niix-1225956414538 Some sceptics make it a habit to be wrong] ''The Australian''.</ref>

Seitz and Singer helped to form institutions such as the [[Heritage Foundation]], [[Competitive Enterprise Institute]] and [[Marshall Institute]] in the United States. Funded by [[corporation]]s and [[Conservativism|conservative]] [[Foundation (United States law)|foundations]], these organizations have opposed many forms of state intervention or regulation of U.S. citizens. In each case the tactics are similar: "discredit the science, disseminate false information, spread confusion, and promote doubt".<ref name=rm/>

The book says that over the course of more than 20 years, Singer, Seitz, (and a few other contrarian scientists) did almost no original scientific research on the issues which they debated. They had once been prominent researchers, but by the time they turned to the topics covered in ''Merchants of Doubt'', they were mostly attacking the reputation and work of others. On every issue they were on the wrong side of the scientific consensus.<ref name=oc2010/>

==Free market fundamentalism==
The book states that Seitz, Singer, Nierenberg and [[Robert Jastrow]] were all fiercely anti-communist and they viewed government regulation as a step towards socialism and communism. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, they looked for another great threat to free market capitalism and found it in environmentalism. They feared that an over-reaction to environmental problems would lead to heavy-handed government intervention in the marketplace and intrusion into people's lives.<ref name=ocmerch/> However, the strategy of denying the reality of environmental problems (such as global warming, acid rain, and ozone destruction) does not make them go away. Oreskes and Conway state that the longer the delay the worse these problems get, and the more likely it is that governments will need to take the draconian measures that conservatives most fear. They say that Seitz, Singer, Nierenberg and Jastrow denied the scientific evidence, contributed to a strategy of delay, and thereby helped to bring about the situation they most dreaded.<ref name=ocmerch>{{harvnb|Oreskes|Conway|2010|pp=248–255}}</ref>

==Reception==

[[Philip Kitcher]] in ''[[Science (magazine)|Science]]'' says that Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway are "two outstanding historians". He also calls ''Merchants of Doubt'' a "fascinating and important study". Kitcher says that the apparently harsh claims against Nierenberg, Seitz, and Singer are "justified through a powerful dissection of the ways in which prominent climate scientists, such as [[Roger Revelle]] and [[Ben Santer]], were exploited or viciously attacked in the press".<ref name=pk/>

In ''[[The Christian Science Monitor]]'', Will Buchanan says that ''Merchants of Doubt'' is exhaustively researched and documented, and may be one of the most important books of 2010. Oreskes and Conway are seen to demonstrate that the doubt merchants are not "objective scientists" as the term is popularly understood. Instead, they are "science-speaking mercenaries" hired by corporations to crunch numbers to prove that the corporations’ products are safe and useful. Buchanan says they are salesmen, not scientists.<ref>Buchanan, Will (June 22, 2010). [http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/Book-Reviews/2010/0622/Merchants-of-Doubt Merchants of Doubt: How “scientific” misinformation campaigns sold untruths to consumers] ''The Christian Science Monitor''.</ref>

Bud Ward published a review of the book in ''The Yale Forum on Climate and the Media''. He wrote that Oreskes and Conway use a combination of thorough scholarly research combined with writing reminiscent of the best investigative journalism, to "unravel deep common links to past environmental and public health controversies". In terms of climate science, the authors' leave "little doubt about their disdain for what they regard as the misuse and abuse of science by a small cabal of scientists they see as largely lacking in requisite climate science expertise".<ref>Ward, Bud (July 8, 2010). [http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2010/07/merchants-of-doubt/ Reviews: Leaving No Doubt on Tobacco, Acid Rain, Climate Change], ''The Yale Forum on Climate and the Media''.</ref>

Phil England writes in ''[[The Ecologist]]'' that the strength of the book is the rigour of the research and the detailed focus on key incidents. He points out, however, that the climate change chapter is a only 50 pages long, and recommends several other books for readers who want to get a broader picture of this aspect: [[James Hoggan]]’s ''[[Climate Cover-Up]]'', [[George Monbiot]]’s ''[[Heat (book)|Heat]]'' and [[Ross Gelbspan]]’s ''[[The Heat is On]]'' and ''[[Boiling Point (book)|Boiling Point]]''. England also points out that there is little coverage about the millions of dollars [[Exxon Mobil]] has put into funding a plethora of groups actively involved in promoting [[climate change denial]] and doubt.<ref>England, Phil (September 10, 2010). [http://www.theecologist.org/reviews/books/592288/merchants_of_doubt.html Merchants of Doubt] ''The Ecologist''.</ref>

A review in ''[[The Economist]]'' calls this a powerful book which articulates the politics involved and the degree to which scientists have sometimes manufactured and exaggerated environmental uncertainties. But the authors fail to fully explain how environmental action has still often proved possible despite countervailing factors.<ref>[http://www.economist.com/node/16374460 All guns blazing: A question of dodgy science], (June 17, 2010), ''The Economist''.</ref>

[[Robert N. Proctor]] writes in ''[[American Scientist]]'' that ''Merchants of Doubt'' is a detailed and artfully written book. He says the book covers the "history of manufactured ignorance" and refers to some other books in this genre: [[David Michaels]]’s ''[[Doubt is their Product]]'' (2008), [[Chris Mooney (journalist)|Chris Mooney]]’s ''[[The Republican War on Science]]'' (2009), [[David Rosner]] and Gerald Markowitz’s ''[[Deceit and Denial]]'' (2002), and his own book ''[[Cancer Wars]]'' (1995).<ref>Proctor, Robert (September-October 2010). [http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/manufactured-ignorance Book Review: Manufactured Ignorance] ''American Scientist''.</ref>

Robin McKie in ''[[The Guardian]]'' states that Oreskes and Conway deserve considerable praise for this outstanding book and for exposing the influence of a small group of cold war ideologues. Their tactic of spreading doubt has confused the public, first in the U.S. and then the U.K., about a series of key scientific issues such as global warming, even though scientists have actually become more certain about their research results. McKie points out that ''Merchants of Doubt'' includes detailed notes on all sources used, is clearly and cleanly outlined, carefully paced, and is "my runaway contender for best science book of the year".<ref name=Mckie8>McKie, Robin (August 8, 2010). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/aug/08/merchants-of-doubt-oreskes-conway "Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M Conway".] ''The Guardian''.</ref>

In December 2010, in an article for ''[[American Thinker]]'', Fred Singer states that ''Merchants of Doubt'' attacks several well-known senior physicists, including the late Fred Seitz, a former president of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. Singer says that Oreskes and Conway claim to be academic historians, yet they have operated in a "completely unprofessional way", by ignoring factual information, not bothering to consult primary sources, and not interviewing any of the scientists in question.<ref name=sfs2010>Singer, S. Fred (December 19, 2010). [http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/12/second_hand_smoke_lung_cancer.html Secondhand Smoke, Lung Cancer, and the Global Warming Debate] ''American Thinker''.</ref> Singer goes on to say, "No matter what the environmental issue—ozone depletion, acid rain, pesticides, etc.—any and all scientific opposition based on objective facts is blamed on an imagined involvement with tobacco companies. None of this is true, of course."<ref name=sfs2010/> He says that he serves on the board of an anti-smoking organization, finds secondhand smoke irritating and unpleasant, and has not been paid by the tobacco lobby or joined any of their front organizations.<ref>{{cite web | last=Singer | first=S. Fred |date=December 19, 2010 | url=http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/12/second_hand_smoke_lung_cancer.html | title=Secondhand Smoke, Lung Cancer, and the Global Warming Debate| publisher=American Thinker|quote=I am a nonsmoker, find secondhand smoke (SHS) to be an irritant and unpleasant, have certainly not been paid by Philip Morris and the tobacco lobby, and have never joined any of their front organizations. And I serve on the advisory board of an anti-smoking organization. My father, who was a heavy smoker, died of emphysema while relatively young. I personally believe that SHS, in addition to being objectionable, cannot possibly be healthy}}</ref>

William O’Keefe and Jeff Kueter from the Marshall Institute provide a critique of ''Merchants of Doubt'' and wonder why such a book was written as although it has the appearance of a scholarly work, it discredits and undermines the reputations of people who in their lifetime contributed greatly to the American nation by questioning their integrity, impugning their character, and questioning their judgement.<ref>{{cite web | last=O’Keefe | first= William |coauthors=Jeff Kueter | date=June 2010 | url=http://www.marshall.org/pdf/materials/894.pdf |title=Clouding the Truth: A Critique of Merchants of Doubt | publisher=Policy Outlook | quote=Although cloaked in the appearance of scholarly work, the book constitutes an effort to discredit and undermine the reputations of three deceased scientists who contributed greatly to our nation... This book questions their integrity, impugns their character, and questions their judgment on the basis of little more than faulty logic and preconceived opinion}}</ref>

==Authors==
Naomi Oreskes is Professor of History and Science Studies at the [[University of California, San Diego]]. Her work came to public attention in 2004 with the publication of “The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change,” in ''Science'', which argued that there was no significant disagreement in the scientific community about the reality of global warming from human causes.<ref name=collins>[http://www.marcovigevani.com/upload/london_2008/Collins_Literary_London_2008_Rights_List.pdf Collins Literary Agency Rights Guide/March 2008]</ref> Erik M. Conway is the historian at NASA's [[Jet Propulsion Laboratory]] at the [[California Institute of Technology]] in Pasadena.<ref name=collins/>

==See also==
*[[Fear, uncertainty and doubt]]
*[[Health effects of tobacco]]
*[[List of books about the politics of science]]
*[[List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming]]
*[[Politics of global warming (United States)]]
*[[Scientific opinion on climate change]]
*[[Tobacco politics]]

==References==
{{Reflist}}

[[Category:Climate change books]]
[[Category:2010 books]]
[[Category:Environmental non-fiction books]]
[[Category:Political books]]
[[Category:Books about the politics of science]]
[[Category:History books]]

Merchants of Doubt

2010-12-22T17:19:39Z

Wikispan: /* Reception */ Move down

Merchants of Doubt

2010-12-19T15:22:55Z

Wikispan: /* Reception */ Wikipedia is not a quote farm. Please trim this down before trying again

{{Infobox book
| name = Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming
| image = [[Image:Merchants of DOUBT.jpg|197px]]
| image_caption =
| author = [[Naomi Oreskes]], [[Erik M. Conway]]
| illustrator =
| cover_artist =
| country =
| series =
| subject = Scientists—Professional Ethics Science news—Moral and ethical aspects
| publisher = [[Bloomsbury Press]]
| pub_date = 2010
| media_type =
| pages = 355 pp.
| isbn = 978-1-59691-610-4
| oclc = 461631066
| dewey = 174.95
| congress = Q147 .O74 2010
}}
'''''Merchants of Doubt''''' is a 2010 book by the American [[History of science|science historians]] [[Naomi Oreskes]] and [[Erik M. Conway]]. It identifies parallels between the [[climate change debate]] and earlier controversies over [[tobacco smoking]], [[acid rain]] and the [[ozone hole|hole in the ozone layer]]. Oreskes and Conway wrote that spreading doubt and confusion was the basic strategy of those opposing action in each case.<ref name = stek/> In particular, [[Fred Seitz]], [[Fred Singer]], and a few other contrarian scientists joined forces with conservative [[think tank]]s and private corporations to challenge the scientific consensus on many contemporary issues.<ref>{{cite book |first1=Naomi |last1=Oreskes |first2=Erik M. |last2=Conway |title=Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=fpMh3nh3JI0C&pg=PP4 |year=2010 |publisher=Bloomsbury Press |isbn=9781596916104 |page=6 |ref=harv}}</ref>

The [[Marshall Institute]] and Fred Singer have been critical of the book, but most other reviewers received it favorably. One reviewer said that ''Merchants of Doubt'' is exhaustively researched and documented, and may be one of the most important books of 2010. Another reviewer saw the book as his choice for best science book of the year.<ref name=Mckie8/>

==Themes==
Oreskes ([[University of California, San Diego]]) and Conway (NASA’s [[Jet Propulsion Laboratory]]) trace the ways in which a handful of [[Conservatism in the United States|politically conservative]] scientists, with strong ties to particular industries, have "played a disproportionate role in debates about controversial questions".<ref name=pk/> These scientists have challenged the [[scientific consensus]] about the dangers of cigarette smoking, the effects of acid rain, the existence of the ozone hole, and the existence of [[anthropogenic climate change]].<ref name=pk/> This has resulted in "deliberate obfuscation" of the issues which has had an influence on public opinion and policy-making.<ref name=pk/> Oreskes and Conway reach the conclusion that:
<blockquote>
There are many reasons why the United States has failed to act on [[global warming]], but at least one is the confusion raised by [[William Nierenberg|Bill Nierenberg]], [[Fred Seitz]], and [[Fred Singer]].<ref name=pk>{{cite journal |author=Kitcher, Philip |authorlink=Philip Kitcher |title=The Climate Change Debates |journal=Science |volume=328 |issue=5983 |pages=1231–2 |date=June 4, 2010 |doi=10.1126/science.1189312 |url=http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/328/5983/1230-a }}</ref><ref>[[Clive Hamilton]] reaches a similar conclusion in his book ''[[Requiem for a Species]]'' (2010, pp. 98–103). Hamilton suggests that the roots of [[climate change denial]] lie in the reaction of American conservatism to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. He argues that as the "red menace" receded, conservatives who had put energy into opposing communism sought other outlets. Hamilton contends that the conservative backlash against climate science was led by three prominent physicists — [[Frederick Seitz]], [[Robert Jastrow]], and [[William Nierenberg]].</ref>
</blockquote>
All physicists, Singer was a rocket scientist, whereas Nierenberg and Seitz worked on the atomic bomb.<ref name=sb>Brown, Seth (May 31, 2010). [http://www.usatoday.com/money/books/reviews/2010-06-01-deathmerchants01_ST_N.htm 'Merchants of Doubt' delves into contrarian scientists] ''USA Today''.</ref> One reviewer of the book states that some "climate sceptics are recycled critics of controls on tobacco and acid rain".<ref>Sachs, Jeffrey (February 19, 2010). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/cif-green/2010/feb/19/climate-change-sceptics-science Climate sceptics are recycled critics of controls on tobacco and acid rain] ''The Guardian''.</ref> As Oreskes and Conway state: "small numbers of people can have large, negative impacts, especially if they are organised, determined and have access to power".<ref name=rm>McKie, Robin (August 1, 2010). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/aug/01/climate-change-robin-mckie "A dark ideology is driving those who deny climate change".] "The Observer", ''The Guardian''.</ref>

==Seitz and Singer==
Seitz and Singer had served in high levels of science administration, and had contact with admirals, generals, and even presidents. They also had considerable media experience, so they could obtain press coverage for their views. The book says, "They used their scientific credentials to present themselves as authorities, and they used their authority to discredit any science they didn't like".<ref name=oc2010>{{harvnb|Oreskes|Conway|2010|p=8}}</ref>

Seitz and Singer were seen to be contrarians in the tobacco debate. Seitz directed a program for the [[R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company]] that funded research defending tobacco. Singer co-wrote a report debunking the risks of second-hand smoke, funded by the [[Tobacco Institute]], which attacked the science behind the finding that there were health risks from passive smoking and argued that it was "part of a political agenda to expand government control over peoples lives".<ref name = stek>Steketee, Mike (November 20, 2010). [http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/some-sceptics-make-it-a-habit-to-be-wrong/story-fn59niix-1225956414538 Some sceptics make it a habit to be wrong] ''The Australian''.</ref>

Seitz and Singer helped to form institutions such as the [[Heritage Foundation]], [[Competitive Enterprise Institute]] and [[Marshall Institute]] in the United States. Funded by [[corporation]]s and [[Conservativism|conservative]] [[Foundation (United States law)|foundations]], these organizations have opposed many forms of state intervention or regulation of U.S. citizens. In each case the tactics are similar: "discredit the science, disseminate false information, spread confusion, and promote doubt".<ref name=rm/>

The book says that over the course of more than 20 years, Singer, Seitz, (and a few other contrarian scientists) did almost no original scientific research on the issues which they debated. They had once been prominent researchers, but by the time they turned to the topics covered in ''Merchants of Doubt'', they were mostly attacking the reputation and work of others. On every issue they were on the wrong side of the scientific consensus.<ref name=oc2010/>

==Free market fundamentalism==
The book states that Seitz, Singer, Nierenberg and [[Robert Jastrow]] were all fiercely anti-communist and they viewed government regulation as a step towards socialism and communism. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, they looked for another great threat to free market capitalism and found it in environmentalism. They feared that an over-reaction to environmental problems would lead to heavy-handed government intervention in the marketplace and intrusion into people's lives.<ref name=ocmerch/> However, the strategy of denying the reality of environmental problems (such as global warming, acid rain, and ozone destruction) does not make them go away. In fact, the longer the delay the worse these problems get, and the more likely it is that governments will need to take the draconian measures that conservatives most fear. The book says that Seitz, Singer, Nierenberg and Jastrow denied the scientific evidence, contributed to a strategy of delay, and thereby helped to bring about the situation they most dreaded.<ref name=ocmerch>{{harvnb|Oreskes|Conway|2010|pp=248–255}}</ref>

==Reception==

[[Philip Kitcher]] in ''[[Science (magazine)|Science]]'' says that Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway are "two outstanding historians". He also calls ''Merchants of Doubt'' a "fascinating and important study". Kitcher says that the apparently harsh claims against Nierenberg, Seitz, and Singer are "justified through a powerful dissection of the ways in which prominent climate scientists, such as [[Roger Revelle]] and [[Ben Santer]], were exploited or viciously attacked in the press".<ref name=pk/>

In ''[[The Christian Science Monitor]]'', Will Buchanan says that ''Merchants of Doubt'' is exhaustively researched and documented, and may be one of the most important books of 2010. Oreskes and Conway are seen to demonstrate that the doubt merchants are not "objective scientists" as the term is popularly understood. Instead, they are "science-speaking mercenaries" hired by corporations to crunch numbers to prove that the corporations’ products are safe and useful. Buchanan says they are salesmen, not scientists.<ref>Buchanan, Will (June 22, 2010). [http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/Book-Reviews/2010/0622/Merchants-of-Doubt Merchants of Doubt: How “scientific” misinformation campaigns sold untruths to consumers] ''The Christian Science Monitor''.</ref>

Bud Ward published a review of the book in ''The Yale Forum on Climate and the Media''. He wrote that Oreskes and Conway use a combination of thorough scholarly research combined with writing reminiscent of the best investigative journalism, to "unravel deep common links to past environmental and public health controversies". In terms of climate science, the authors' leave "little doubt about their disdain for what they regard as the misuse and abuse of science by a small cabal of scientists they see as largely lacking in requisite climate science expertise".<ref>Ward, Bud (July 8, 2010). [http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2010/07/merchants-of-doubt/ Reviews: Leaving No Doubt on Tobacco, Acid Rain, Climate Change], ''The Yale Forum on Climate and the Media''.</ref>

Phil England writes in ''[[The Ecologist]]'' that the strength of the book is the rigour of the research and the detailed focus on key incidents. He points out, however, that the climate change chapter is a only 50 pages long, and recommends several other books for readers who want to get a broader picture of this aspect: [[James Hoggan]]’s ''[[Climate Cover-Up]]'', [[George Monbiot]]’s ''[[Heat (book)|Heat]]'' and [[Ross Gelbspan]]’s ''[[The Heat is On]]'' and ''[[Boiling Point (book)|Boiling Point]]''. England also points out that there is little coverage about the millions of dollars [[Exxon Mobil]] has put into funding a plethora of groups actively involved in promoting [[climate change denial]] and doubt.<ref>England, Phil (September 10, 2010). [http://www.theecologist.org/reviews/books/592288/merchants_of_doubt.html Merchants of Doubt] ''The Ecologist''.</ref>

A review in ''[[The Economist]]'' calls this a powerful book which articulates the politics involved and the degree to which scientists have sometimes manufactured and exaggerated environmental uncertainties. But the authors fail to fully explain how environmental action has still often proved possible despite countervailing factors.<ref>[http://www.economist.com/node/16374460 All guns blazing: A question of dodgy science], (June 17, 2010), ''The Economist''.</ref>

[[Robert N. Proctor]] writes in ''[[American Scientist]]'' that ''Merchants of Doubt'' is a detailed and artfully written book. He says the book covers the "history of manufactured ignorance" and refers to some other books in this genre: [[David Michaels]]’s ''[[Doubt is their Product]]'' (2008), [[Chris Mooney (journalist)|Chris Mooney]]’s ''[[The Republican War on Science]]'' (2009), [[David Rosner]] and Gerald Markowitz’s ''[[Deceit and Denial]]'' (2002), and his own book ''[[Cancer Wars]]'' (1995).<ref>Proctor, Robert (September-October 2010). [http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/manufactured-ignorance Book Review: Manufactured Ignorance] ''American Scientist''.</ref>

Robin McKie in ''[[The Guardian]]'' states that Oreskes and Conway deserve considerable praise for this outstanding book and for exposing the influence of a small group of cold war ideologues. Their tactic of spreading doubt has confused the public, first in the U.S. and then the U.K., about a series of key scientific issues such as global warming, even though scientists have actually become more certain about their research results. McKie points out that ''Merchants of Doubt'' includes detailed notes on all sources used, is clearly and cleanly outlined, carefully paced, and is "my runaway contender for best science book of the year".<ref name=Mckie8>McKie, Robin (August 8, 2010). [http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/aug/08/merchants-of-doubt-oreskes-conway "Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M Conway".] ''The Guardian''.</ref>

==Authors==
Naomi Oreskes is Professor of History and Science Studies at the [[University of California, San Diego]]. Her work came to public attention in 2004 with the publication of “The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change,” in ''Science'', which argued that there was no significant disagreement in the scientific community about the reality of global warming from human causes.<ref name=collins>[http://www.marcovigevani.com/upload/london_2008/Collins_Literary_London_2008_Rights_List.pdf Collins Literary Agency Rights Guide/March 2008]</ref> Erik M. Conway is the historian at NASA's [[Jet Propulsion Laboratory]] at the [[California Institute of Technology]] in Pasadena.<ref name=collins/>

==See also==
*[[Fear, uncertainty and doubt]]
*[[Health effects of tobacco]]
*[[List of books about the politics of science]]
*[[List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming]]
*[[Politics of global warming (United States)]]
*[[Scientific opinion on climate change]]
*[[Tobacco politics]]

==References==
{{Reflist}}

[[Category:Climate change books]]
[[Category:2010 books]]
[[Category:Environmental non-fiction books]]
[[Category:Political books]]
[[Category:Books about the politics of science]]
[[Category:History books]]

Merchants of Doubt

2010-11-17T07:10:00Z

Wikispan: Undid revision 397215498 by JournalScholar (talk)

FilesTube

2010-10-17T18:26:58Z

Wikispan: Per talk

{{primary sources}}
{{orphan|date=August 2010}}

{{Infobox Website
| name = FilesTube
| logo = [[Image:Filestube current logo.gif|right]]
| screenshot =
| caption =
| url = [http://www.filestube.com/ FilesTube.com]
| commercial =
| type = [[Web search engine]]
| language = English
| registration =
| owner = [[Red-Sky Sp. z.o.o.|Red-Sky]]
| author =
| launch date = June 2007<ref>{{cite web|url=http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.filestube.com|title=see first result}}</ref>
| current status =
| revenue =
| slogan = Download everything!
| alexa = 140<ref name="Ax140">{{cite web| url=http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/filestube.com| title=alexa site info for filestube.com}}</ref>
}}
'''FilesTube''' is a [[web search engine]] established in 2007<ref>{{cite web|url=http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.filestube.com|title=web.archive.org entry on FilesTube. The first archived results are from 2007}}</ref>and specializing in searching files in various file sharing and uploading sites such as [[RapidShare]] or [[Megaupload]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.filestube.com/about.html|title=About FilesTube}}</ref>, but now also has sections for Video, Games, Lyrics and Software<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.filestube.com/|title=see bar at the top of the screen}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2010/jul/09/convenience-is-just-an-app-away/?entertainmentlifeentertainment|title=<nowiki>[FilesTube]</nowiki> is a dedicated search site to find downloadable files such as audio, video and documents}}</ref>. It is owned by Polish company [[Red-Sky]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.red-sky.pl/show/25,filestube1/|title=English entry in Red-Sky's portfolio}}</ref>

FilesTube removes illegal content from its search results on request.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.filestube.com/dmca.html|title=FilesTube's DMCA policy}}</ref>

FilesTube is the most popular of its kind, holding an [[Alexa Internet|Alexa]] rank of 140.<ref name ="Ax140" />

==Name and logo==
[[File:Filestube old logo.gif|thumb|The old logo of FilesTube, showing a very close resemblance to [[YouTube]]'s logo.]]
The name and logo of the website are in the style of the video-sharing website [[YouTube]]. While the old logo looked practically the same as the YouTube logo (with only "Files" replacing "You" and the color being blue), slight change have been made to the current logo.

==Reception==
Donnie Jenkins of [[Chattanooga Times Free Press]] called the website "a dedicated search site to find downloadable files such as audio, video and documents"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2010/jul/09/convenience-is-just-an-app-away/?entertainmentlifeentertainment|title=Jenkins: Convenience is just an app away}}</ref>.

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
*[http://www.filestube.com/ FilesTube]
*[http://blog.filestube.com/ FilesTube.com development blog]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Filestube}}
[[Category:Internet search engines]]
[[Category:File hosting]]
[[Category:File sharing]]
[[Category:Online music and lyrics databases]]
[[Category:Internet properties established in 2007]]

{{Searchengine-website-stub}}

FilesTube

2010-10-17T16:46:54Z

Wikispan: Refimprove

{{refimprove}}
{{orphan|date=August 2010}}

{{Infobox Website
| name = FilesTube
| logo = [[Image:Filestube current logo.gif|right]]
| screenshot =
| caption =
| url = [http://www.filestube.com/ FilesTube.com]
| commercial =
| type = [[Web search engine]]
| language = English
| registration =
| owner = [[Red-Sky Sp. z.o.o.|Red-Sky]]
| author =
| launch date = June 2007<ref>{{cite web|url=http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.filestube.com|title=see first result}}</ref>
| current status =
| revenue =
| slogan = Download everything!
| alexa = 140<ref name="Ax140">{{cite web| url=http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/filestube.com| title=alexa site info for filestube.com}}</ref>
}}
'''FilesTube''' is a [[web search engine]] established in 2007<ref>{{cite web|url=http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.filestube.com|title=web.archive.org entry on FilesTube. The first archived results are from 2007}}</ref>and specializing in searching files in various file sharing and uploading sites such as [[RapidShare]] or [[Megaupload]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.filestube.com/about.html|title=About FilesTube}}</ref>, but now also has sections for Video, Games, Lyrics and Software<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.filestube.com/|title=see bar at the top of the screen}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2010/jul/09/convenience-is-just-an-app-away/?entertainmentlifeentertainment|title=<nowiki>[FilesTube]</nowiki> is a dedicated search site to find downloadable files such as audio, video and documents}}</ref>. It is owned by Polish company [[Red-Sky]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.red-sky.pl/show/25,filestube1/|title=English entry in Red-Sky's portfolio}}</ref>

FilesTube removes illegal content from its search results on request.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.filestube.com/dmca.html|title=FilesTube's DMCA policy}}</ref>

FilesTube is the most popular of its kind, holding an [[Alexa Internet|Alexa]] rank of 140.<ref name ="Ax140" />

==Name and logo==
[[File:Filestube old logo.gif|thumb|The old logo of FilesTube, showing a very close resemblance to [[YouTube]]'s logo.]]
The name and logo of the website are in the style of the video-sharing website [[YouTube]]. While the old logo looked practically the same as the YouTube logo (with only "Files" replacing "You" and the color being blue), slight change have been made to the current logo.

==Reception==
Donnie Jenkins of [[Chattanooga Times Free Press]] called the website "a dedicated search site to find downloadable files such as audio, video and documents"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2010/jul/09/convenience-is-just-an-app-away/?entertainmentlifeentertainment|title=Jenkins: Convenience is just an app away}}</ref>.

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
*[http://www.filestube.com/ FilesTube]
*[http://blog.filestube.com/ FilesTube.com development blog]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Filestube}}
[[Category:Internet search engines]]
[[Category:File hosting]]
[[Category:File sharing]]
[[Category:Online music and lyrics databases]]
[[Category:Internet properties established in 2007]]

{{Searchengine-website-stub}}

The Heartland Institute

2010-10-17T08:30:17Z

Wikispan: That is NOT a correction, per the BBC source.

{{Infobox Non-profit
| Non-profit_name = The Heartland Institute
| Non-profit_logo = [[Image:Heartland Logo.png|200px|center]]
| vector_logo =
| Non-profit_type = [[501(c)#501(c)(3)|501(c)(3)]]
| founded_date =
| founder =
| location = 19 South [[LaSalle Street]] Suite 903 Chicago, Illinois, USA
| area_served = Worldwide
| origins =
| key_people = President and CEO: Joseph L. Bast Executive VP: Dan Miller VP: Kevin Fitzgerald Chairman: Herbert J. Walberg
| focus =
| method =
| revenue = [[United States dollar|US$]]2,747,328 (2006)<ref name="IRS">[http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990_pdf_archive/363/363309812/363309812_200612_990.pdf IRS Form 990] (2006), The Heartland Institute</ref>
| num_volunteers =
| owner =
| Non-profit_slogan =
| homepage = [http://www.heartland.org/ www.heartland.org]
| dissolved =
| footnotes =
}}

'''The Heartland Institute''' is a [[conservative]] American public policy [[think tank]] based in [[Chicago, Illinois]] which advocates [[free market]] policies.<ref name="irish-times">{{cite news | work = [[Irish Times]] | title = Anti-Obama protesters march in Washington | url = http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2009/0914/1224254474903.html | date = September 14, 2009 | accessdate = September 3, 2010 | first = Ed | last = Pilkington | quote = They include right-wing think tanks such as the Heartland Institute...}}</ref> The Institute is designated as a [[501(c)(3)]][[non-profit]] by the [[Internal Revenue Service]] and advised by a 15 member board of directors, which meets quarterly. As of 2008, it has a full-time staff of 30, including editors and senior fellows.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.heartland.org/about/ | title = About Us | publisher = Heartland Institute}}</ref> The Institute was founded in 1984 and conducts research and advocacy work on issues including [[government spending]], [[taxation]], [[healthcare]], [[tobacco smoking|tobacco]] policy, [[global warming]], [[information technology]] and [[free-market environmentalism]].

The Heartland Institute has been described as [[right-wing politics|right-wing]].<ref>See, for example:
* {{Cite news | work = [[Irish Times]] | title = Anti-Obama protesters march in Washington | url = http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2009/0914/1224254474903.html | date = September 14, 2009 | accessdate = September 3, 2010 | first = Ed | last = Pilkington | quote = They include right-wing think tanks such as the Heartland Institute...}}
* {{Cite news | work = [[The Independent]] | title = Tobacco and oil pay for climate conference | first = Steve | last = Connor | date = March 3, 2008 | accessdate = September 2, 2010 | url = http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/tobacco-and-oil-pay-for-climate-conference-790474.html | quote = The first international conference designed to question the scientific consensus on climate change is being sponsored by a right-wing American think-tank which receives money from the oil industry.}}
* {{Cite news | publisher = [[BBC]] | title = Climate sceptics rally to expose 'myth' | url = http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8694544.stm | first = Roger | last = Harrabin | date = May 21, 2010 | accessdate = September 3, 2010 | quote = At the world's biggest gathering of climate change sceptics, organised by the right-wing Heartland Institute...}}
* {{Cite news | work = [[Philadelphia City Paper]] | url = http://citypaper.net/articles/2009/12/17/pennsylvania-climate-change-action-plan | title = Shooting the Messenger | first = Julia | last = Harte | date = December 16, 2009 | accessdate = September 5, 2010 | quote = Jay Lehr, science director at the right-wing Heartland Institute, concurs.}}
* {{Cite news | work = [[St. Petersburg Times]] | quote = ...the content was dictated by a right-wing group called the Heartland Institute that has relentlessly questioned the existence of global warming. | date = November 20, 2007 | accessdate = September 5, 2010 | title = Using smoke & mirrors to question global warming | url = http://blogs.tampabay.com/energy/2007/11/using-smoke-mir.html | first = Craig | last = Pittman}}</ref> In the 1990s, the group worked with the tobacco company [[Philip Morris]] to question the science linking [[passive smoking|secondhand smoke]] to health risks, and to lobby against government public health reforms.<ref name="AJPH1">{{cite journal|doi=10.2105/AJPH.2009.179150|last=Tesler|first=L. E.|coauthors=Malone, R. E.|title="Our Reach Is Wide by Any Corporate Standard": How the Tobacco Industry Helped Defeat the Clinton Health Plan and Why It Matters Now|journal=[[American Journal of Public Health]]|year=2010|volume=100|issue=7|pages=1174–1188|quote=At Philip Morris's request, for example, Heartland Institute staff met with 2
Republican congressmen 'to encourage opposition to the Clinton plan and FET [Federal Excise
Tax] hikes' }}</ref><ref name="indy"/><ref name="merchants"/>, pp. 233–234 More recently, the Institute has focused on questioning the [[scientific opinion on climate change|scientific consensus on climate change]], and has sponsored meetings of [[climate change skeptics]].<ref name="bbc"/>

==History and leadership==
In its early years, the Heartland Institute focused on policies relevant to the [[Midwestern United States]]. Since 1993 it has focused on reaching elected officials and opinion leaders in all 50 states. In addition to research, the Heartland Institute features an Internet application called PolicyBot which serves as a clearinghouse for research from other conservative think tanks such as the [[Heritage Foundation]], the [[American Legislative Exchange Council]], and Libertarian organization the [[Cato Institute]]. The Institute's president and CEO is Joseph L. Bast.

==Positions==
===Global warming===
The Heartland Institute questions the [[scientific opinion on climate change|scientific consensus on climate change]], arguing that [[global warming]] is not occurring and, further, that warming would be beneficial if it did occur.<ref name="higw">{{cite web | publisher = Heartland Institute | url = http://www.heartland.org/pdf/ieguide.pdf | format = PDF | title = Instant Expert Guide: Global Warming | accessdate = 4 March 2008 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20061201133847/http://www.heartland.org/pdf/ieguide.pdf |archivedate = December 1, 2006}}</ref> The institute is a member organization of the [[Cooler Heads Coalition]], which describes itself as "an informal and ad-hoc group focused on dispelling the myths of global warming."<ref>{{cite web |publisher=Cooler Heads Coalition |title=About GlobalWarming.org |accessdate=2008-08-22 |url=http://www.globalwarming.org/about }}</ref> In ''[[Merchants of Doubt]]'', [[Naomi Oreskes]] and Erik Conway wrote that the Heartland Institute was known "for its persistent questioning of climate science, for its promotion of 'experts' who have done little, if any, peer-reviewed climate research, and for its sponsorship of a conference in New York City in 2008 alleging that the scientific community's work on global warming is a fake."<ref name="merchants"/>, pp. 233–234

In 2008, 2009, and 2010, the Heartland Institute sponsored international conferences bringing hundreds of [[global warming skeptics]] to New York City. Speakers included [[Richard Lindzen]], a professor of meteorology at MIT; [[Roy Spencer (scientist)|Roy Spencer]], a former NASA scientist; [[S. Fred Singer]], who was founding dean of the School of Environmental and Planetary Sciences at the University of Miami and founding director of the National Weather Satellite Service; [[Harrison Schmitt]], a former NASA astronaut and Apollo 17 moonwalker; and [[John Theon]], a former NASA administrator. Participants criticized the [[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]] and [[Al Gore]].<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/04/science/earth/04climate.html | title = Cool View of Science at Meeting on Warming | first = Andrew | last = Revkin | authorlink = Andrew Revkin | work = [[New York Times]] | date = March 4, 2008 | accessdate = March 4, 2008}}</ref><ref name="indy"/> The [[BBC]] reported that the heavily politicized nature of the Heartland conferences led some "moderate" climate skeptics to avoid them.<ref name="bbc">{{cite news | publisher = [[BBC]] | title = Climate sceptics rally to expose 'myth' | url = http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8694544.stm | first = Roger | last = Harrabin | date = May 21, 2010 | accessdate = September 3, 2010}}</ref>

In 2008 a bibliography written by [[Dennis Avery]] was posted on Heartland’s Web site, titled "500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares,”<ref>[http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=21978 500 Scientists Whose Research Contradicts Man-Made Global Warming Scares], by Dennis T. Avery. From the Heartland Institute website; published September 14, 2007, accessed June 20, 2008.</ref><ref name="press release">{{cite press release | title = Controversy Arises Over Lists of Scientists Whose Research Contradicts Man-Made Global Warming Scares | publisher = Heartland Institute | date = May 5, 2008 | url = http://heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=23207 | accessdate = September 3, 2010}}</ref> In late April 2008, Heartland reported that the web site ''[[DeSmogBlog]]'' had "targeted The Heartland Institute in late April 2008, and in particular two lists posted on Heartland’s Web site of scientists whose published work contradicts some of the main tenets of global warming alarmism." <ref name="press release" /> ''[[The Sydney Morning Herald]]'' reported that the work of [[Jim Salinger]], chief scientist at New Zealand's National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, was "misrepresented" as part of a "denial campaign".<ref name="smh"/>

In response to criticism, the Heartland Institute changed the title of the list to “500 Scientists Whose Research Contradicts Man-Made Global Warming Scares.” <ref name="press release"/> Heartland did not remove any of the scientists' names from the list.<ref name="press release" /><ref name="smh" /> Dennis Avery explained, "Not all of these researchers would describe themselves as global warming skeptic"..."but the evidence in their studies is there for all to see.”<ref name="press release" /> Heartland’s president, [[Joseph Bast]], wrote “They have no right -- legally or ethically -- to demand that their names be removed from a bibliography composed by researchers with whom they disagree. Their names probably appear in hundreds or thousands of bibliographies accompanying other articles or in books with which they disagree. Do they plan to sue hundreds or thousands of their colleagues? The proper response is to engage in scholarly debate, not demand imperiously that the other side redact its publications.”<ref name="press release"/>

=== Smoking ===
In the 1990s, the Heartland Institute worked with [[Philip Morris]] to question the link between [[passive smoking|secondhand smoke]] and health risks.<ref name="indy"/><ref name="merchants"/>, pp. 233–234 Philip Morris used Heartland to distribute tobacco-industry material, and arranged for the Heartland Institute to publish "policy studies" which summarized Philip Morris reports.<ref name="merchants"/><ref>{{cite web | title = Roy Marden to Thomas Borelli et al. | url = http://www.pmdocs.com/PDF/2075574226D_4227_0.PDF | format = PDF | publisher = [http://www.pmdocs.com/ Philip Morris Documents Archive] | date = April 22, 1997}}</ref> The Heartland Institute also undertook a variety of other activities on behalf of Philip Morris, including meeting with legislators, holding "off-the-record" briefings, and producing op-eds, radio interviews, and letters.<ref name="merchants"/><ref>{{cite web | title = Opposition to Fedsuit | author = Roy Marden | url = http://www.pmdocs.com/PDF/2077575920A_5921_0.PDF | format = PDF | publisher = [http://www.pmdocs.com/ Philip Morris Documents Archive] | date = October 26, 1999}}</ref> In 1994, at the request of Philip Morris, the Heartland Institute met with [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] Congressmen to encourage them to oppose increases in the [[excise|federal excise tax]]. Heartland reported back to Philip Morris that the Congressmen were "strongly in our camp", and planned further meetings with other legislators.<ref>{{cite web | title = FET Update | url = http://www.pmdocs.com/PDF/2046554465_4467_0.PDF | format = PDF | publisher = [http://www.pmdocs.com/ Philip Morris Documents Archive] | date = January 28, 1994}}</ref>

==Publications==
The Heartland Institute publishes five monthly public policy newspapers aimed at state legislators. These include: ''Budget and Tax News'', which advocates lower taxes and balanced budgets for states and the federal government; ''School Reform News'', which calls for greater competition and [[school choice]]; ''Environment & Climate News,'' which focuses on "market-based environmental protection"; ''Health Care News'', devoted to consumer-driven health care reform and edited by [[Ben Domenech]]; and ''Infotech and Telecom News,'' which covers the technology and telecommunications industries from a free market perspective. The five monthly publications have a circulation total of nearly 200,000.<ref>{{cite web |publisher=Heartland Institute |url=http://www.heartland.org/about/profileresults.html?profile=6110DE2CC2614EF79267933376E6B380&directory=0490F571009CFDBBCAA4E62B8A3EBAE2 |title=Staff: Joseph Bast |accessdate=2009-12-10}}</ref>

==Funding==
According to its brochures, the Heartland Institute receives money from approximately 1,600 individuals and organizations, and no single corporate entity donates more than 5% of the operating budget.<ref>http://www.heartland.org/FAQArticle.cfm?faqId=7</ref> Heartland states that it does not accept government funds and does not conduct contract research for special-interest groups.<ref>{{cite web | last = Bast | first = Joseph | url = http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=10582 | title = Welcome to The Heartland Institute! | work = Heartlander | publisher = The Heartland Institute | date= April 13, 2007}}</ref>

[[MediaTransparency]] reported that the Heartland Institute received funding from [[conservatism in the United States|politically conservative]] foundations such as the [[Castle Rock Foundation]], the [[Sarah Scaife Foundation]], the [[John M. Olin Foundation]], and the [[Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation]].<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.mediatransparency.com/recipientgrants.php?recipientID=152 | title = Heartland Institute Funding | publisher = [[MediaTransparency]] | accessdate= June 20, 2008}}</ref> {{Dead link|date=September 2010}}

Oil companies have contributed to the Heartland Institute, including over $600,000 from [[ExxonMobil]] between 1998 and 2005.<ref name="nyt-skeptics"/> Greenpeace reported that the Heartland Institute received almost $800,000 from ExxonMobil.<ref name="smh">{{cite news | work = [[Sydney Morning Herald]] | title = The climate change smokescreen | first = David | last = McKnight | date = August 2, 2008 | accessdate = December 28, 2009 | url = http://www.smh.com.au/news/global-warming/the-climate-change-smokescreen/2008/08/01/1217097533885.html}}</ref> By 2008, ExxonMobil had stopped funding to Heartland.{{Dubious|date=September 2010}} Joseph Bast, president of the Heartland Institute, argued that ExxonMobil was simply distancing itself from Heartland out of concern for its public image.<ref name="nyt-skeptics">{{cite news | work = [[New York Times]] | title = Skeptics Dispute Climate Worries and Each Other | first = Andrew | last = Revkin | authorlink = Andrew Revkin | date = March 8, 2009 | accessdate = September 2, 2010 | url = http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/09/science/earth/09climate.html}}</ref>

The Heartland Institute has also received funding and support from the tobacco company [[Philip Morris]].<ref name="merchants">{{cite book |last= Oreskes | authorlink = Naomi Oreskes | first= Naomi |coauthors= Erik M. Conway |title= [[Merchants of Doubt]] |publisher= [[Bloomsbury Press]] |year= 2010 |isbn= 978-1-59691-610-4}}</ref>
''[[The Independent]]'' reported that Heartland's receipt of donations from Exxon and Philip Morris indicates a "direct link"..."between anti-global warming sceptics funded by the oil industry and the opponents of the scientific evidence showing that passive smoking can damage people's health."<ref name="indy">{{cite news | work = [[The Independent]] | title = Tobacco and oil pay for climate conference | first = Steve | last = Connor | date = March 3, 2008 | accessdate = September 2, 2010 | url = http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/tobacco-and-oil-pay-for-climate-conference-790474.html}}</ref>

As of 2006, the Walton Family Foundation (run by the family which founded [[Wal-Mart]]) had contributed approximately $300,000 to the Heartland Institute. The Heartland Institute published an op-ed in the ''[[Louisville Courier-Journal]]'' defending Wal-Mart against criticism over its treatment of workers. The Walton Family Foundation donations were not disclosed in the op-ed, and the editor of the ''Courier-Journal'' stated that he was unaware of the connection and would probably not have published the op-ed had he known of it.<ref name="sp-times">{{cite news | work = [[St. Petersburg Times]] | title = Corporate spin can come in disguise | date = September 10, 2006 | accessdate = September 3, 2010 | first = Bill | last = Adair | url = http://www.sptimes.com/2006/09/10/Worldandnation/Corporate_spin_can_co.shtml}}</ref> The ''[[St. Petersburg Times]]'' described the Heartland Institute as "particularly energetic defending Wal-Mart."<ref name="sp-times"/> Heartland has stated that its authors were not "paid to defend Wal-Mart" and did not receive funding from the corporation; it did not disclose the $300,000+ received from the Walton Family Foundation.<ref name="sp-times"/>

==See also==
[[List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming]]

==References==
{{Reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.heartland.org Heartland's official website]
*[http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartland_Institute Sourcewatch - More detailed funding information]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Heartland Institute, The}}
[[Category:Political and economic think tanks in the United States]]
[[Category:Libertarian think tanks]]
[[Category:Libertarian organizations based in the United States]]
[[Category:Organizations of environmentalism skeptics and critics]]
[[Category:Non-profit organizations based in Chicago, Illinois]]