The Koch brothers-affiliated, global warming-denying Heartland Institute is gearing up for its big climate change conference next month in Vegas. And to get everyone excited, they're sponsoring an extra-special advertorial section in the Washington Times. Anyone with an interest in disputing the scientific consensus on climate change -- and $10,000 to spare -- is welcome to contribute their thoughts.
Here's the email that was sent around by the Times:
As you may know, The Heartland Institute is hosting a Washington Times Special section to showcase organizations and scientists from around the world who question whether “man-made global warming” will be harmful to plants, animals, or human welfare. This section will be featured prominently at the 9th International Conference on Climate Change next week.
With this, you are invited to be a part of this special print and digital section with an op-ed in print and digital formats.
You can support the section and have the chance to write an edit and compliment the issue with a full page, full color display ad for your organization for just $10,000. The section will appear online at www.washingtontimes.com and will be advertised with over a million impressions online and with over 500,000 emails.
SPACE IS LIMITED and we are closing space on the issue very soon - Deadline is END OF DAY FRIDAY for a reservation and next Monday to coordinate details/edit/Ad.
Anyway, please call or email as soon as possible if you would like to participate.
Thanks and look forward to our discussion.
The Washington Times
Salon followed up with Corbe, who confirmed that Heartland is offering advertisers the opportunity to both display ads and to share their views on global warming in an Op-Ed format. There's nothing too out-of-the-ordinary about that: Corbe described it as native advertising, an increasingly common way for corporations to get their message out. In the conservative Washington Times, presumably, Heartland's assuming it'll find an audience receptive to its message.
It's a bit rarer, though, to see the slimy mechanism of industry-funded climate denial so clearly in action. At least in this case, the paid-for editorials will be marked as such.