The Real Shark Con, Controlling Our Seas, And Other Stories - PEW Trust -

 
The Real Shark Con, Controlling Our Seas, And Other Stories 

 There was something fishy about shark conservation from the start; the re-branding of a charismatic man eater, the crisis they faced, and the self righteous finger pointing at the villains responsible for their impending demise. The closer one looked at the hyperbolic claims, the murkier the waters became. Straight question? No answer. Just a calendar offer. Challenge claims unsubstantiated by any scientific evidence? Named and shamed as someone intent on discrediting shark conservation. With hindsight, 'shark con's' flirtation with self-destruction was way beyond my scepticism and imagination. And way beyond the troops they rallied for the cause. 

A Few Words About The Pew Charitable Trusts 

Founded by the children of Joseph N. Pew, CEO of the Sun Oil Company, (Sunoco), the Pew Charitable Trusts have donated millions to numerous charitable organisations that share the Pew family's philosophy and beliefs in education, religion, medicine and social welfare. They also donate to environmental groups. 

Sunoco is considered an environmental leader in the oil and gas industry. And Pew believe they can help to solve the nation's problems. That nation being the USA. The Shark Trust in the UK are just one of 85 NGOs who receive funding from Pew, as part of the Shark Alliance, which Pew formed. 

When the various NGOs need to meet up, Pew pays for the flights. Understandably the benefactor expects the various environmental groups within the Shark Alliance to toe their party line, else lose their funding. It's been alleged that Pew funded rival groups to compete with any dissenters, consequently when the dust settled from the infighting, those still standing were in Pew's corner. 

There's no evidence this happened, but the practice of manufacturing rival pseudo groups for a punch up is well known within PR. Such groups are known as 'AstroTurf'. Because the grass roots aren't real. 

The important thing to remember here is that Pew are the biggest hitter in shark conservation, and they're an American charitable foundation created from an American oil corporation. 

The obvious question is: why is an American oil company channelling dollars to save sharks? Scuba divers are natural ambassadors for sharks. They actively want to see them in their natural habitat, consequently they're major advocates for shark conservation. So I asked them the question. The answer I received from the self confessed cynics was that it was a strategy to improve the oil company's image. And there's nothing wrong with that.

Greenwashing 

Greenwashing was identified by New York environmentalist Jay Westervelt in the 1980's, in response to the hotel industry promoting the re-use of towels to help save the planet, and to show hotels cared. Westervelt found that the reality was few hotels made efforts towards helping the environment, but the green sheen increased their profit. Less towels to wash less often saved them money. It wasn't whitewashing. It subtler than that. 

Oil corporations who've reinvented themselves as energy corporations, are keen to push their environmental credentials. Possibly the best known example is BP, British Petroleum, who developed their 'Beyond Petroleum' tag line from their initials, suggesting their commitment to renewables. 

They changed their company logo to the eco-friendly yellow and green sunburst. Pew were not just the benevolent green face of Sunoco. They got busy, founding SeaWeb, 'the only international, non-profit organisation dedicated to strategically communicating about ocean issues.' 

One of the first things SeaWeb did was commission a survey to discover which ocean issue would best engage the public. The results told SeaWeb that 81% of Americans thought oil spills were a very serious problem. Overfishing on the other hand wasn't considered a very serious problem, and was bundled with 'loss of critical species' to even register as a meaningful indicator of trouble. Yet when SeaWeb reviewed the poll in their November 1996 update, the only specific threat mentioned was overfishing. "71% agree that overfishing is threatening the health and stability of the marine environment." Oil spills didn't get a mention. 

 Negative attention was diverted from oil companies to the patsy of fisheries, The important thing to remember here? Oil companies were to blame in the minds of the public. Until they were told the problem was overfishing. 



Source: http://blog.through-the-gaps.co.uk/2012/11/the-real-shark-con-controlling-our-seas.html