news.com.com— Chevrolet created a contest to let users make their own ad for the Chevy Tahoe, but the company let a couple slip by under its nose depicting the SUV as a gas-guzzling, environment-destroying machine.
Apr 1, 2006View in Crawl 4
Do you believe everything you read on the Internet?Look at the organization... *ahem*... Washington, DC lobbyists you're quoting:<a class="user" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Center_for_Public_Policy_Research">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Center_for_Public_Policy_Research</a>I'll spare you the entire article (a favor I'm sure the rest of the Digg.com community could have asked of you) and share some excerpts:"In 2002 ExxonMobil donated $30,000 for "educational activities" and a further $15,000 for general support. [3] (<a class="user" href="http://www2.exxonmobil.com/files/corporate/public_policy1.pdf)">http://www2.exxonmobil.com/files/corporate/public_policy1.pdf)</a> In 2003 the company boosted its general operating support to $25,000 with another $30,000 for 'global climate change/EnviroTruth website""In 1997, NCPPR opposed action on global warming at an international summit in Kyoto, Japan. It established the Kyoto Earth Summit Information Center, issued an "Earth Summit Fact Sheet" and fed anti-treaty quotes to the media through a "free interview locator service" that offered "assistance to journalists seeking interviews with leading scientists, economists and public policy experts on global warming.""Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, NCPPR began using the rhetoric of anti-terrorism to attack environmentalists. In May 2002, it created the Envirotruth web site, to attack what it called the "jihad" that environmental activists are waging against corporations."Just because it's on t3h iNtern3ts doesn't mean that it's not politically or economically motivated to present a certain point of view.Another funny thing you notice... Source Watch is completely user-editable. The National Center for Public Policy Research isn't. Just for grins, let's look at Wikipedia.<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming</a>Notice how a completely user-editable encyclopedia seems to contradict just about everything in your article? Do you think that's a coincidence?I suggest you take a debate class and perhaps a course on proper sourcing of materials--if only to prevent you from looking stupid in the future as you continue to quote anything you "found on google in less than a second." I'd be willing to bet that's about as much time as you spent analyzing the information you found for accuracy.
But now with technological advances, we are seeing hybrid SUVs. Probably not as much room as the current suburban, but it's a start.Ethanol is starting to get better, but the 85 percent requires special cars and it isn't practical for a large scale population.I don't see this country turning to alternative fuels for awhile. The average citizen usually buys used cars.It saddens me that it has taken this long to finally roll out the alternative fuels and the generations to come will have to pay for our mistakes.
Ford and GM were not around when the glaciers melted 10,000 years ago.These so called "environmentalists" are simply front groups trying to destroy this nation in anyway possible to create a socialist/communist regime. They start with smashing major companies in order to create a larger government, and turn the American people into socialist puppets. "Forget weapons of mass destruction, the real threat is the SUV" ??Would you prefer breathing .00002% of CO2 or having your head cut off by Abdul and his brother Achmed?
sixsiderApr 1, 2006
Please watch this one:<a class="user" href="http://www.chevyapprentice.com/view.php?country=us&uniqueid=87fbd512-1254-1029-98eb-0013724ff5a7">http://www.chevyapprentice.com/view.php?country=us&uniqueid=87fbd512-1254-1029-98eb-0013724ff5a7</a>And...<a class="user" href="http://digg.com/technology/Chevrolet_gets_owned_by_their_own_The_apprectice_promotion">http://digg.com/technology/Chevrolet_gets_owned_by_their_own_The_apprectice_promotion</a><a class="user" href="http://digg.com/technology/When_Viral_Internet_Marketing_Goes_Bad">http://digg.com/technology/When_Viral_Internet_Marketing_Goes_Bad</a><a class="user" href="http://digg.com/links/GM_Launches_Create_a_Canned_Commercial_">http://digg.com/links/GM_Launches_Create_a_Canned_Commercial_</a><a class="user" href="http://digg.com/technology/Probably_not_what_Chevy_had_in_mind">http://digg.com/technology/Probably_not_what_Chevy_had_in_mind</a><a class="user" href="http://digg.com/design/New_Chevy_commercial">http://digg.com/design/New_Chevy_commercial</a><a class="user" href="http://digg.com/design/Make_Your_Own_Chevy_Tahoe_Ad">http://digg.com/design/Make_Your_Own_Chevy_Tahoe_Ad</a>
manvsmonsterApr 1, 2006
That was great.
dinkApr 2, 2006
<a class="user" href="http://www.chevyapprentice.com/view.php?country=us&uniqueid=8824fd0c-1349-1029-98eb-0013724ff5a7">http://www.chevyapprentice.com/view.php?country=us&uniqueid=8824fd0c-1349-1029-98eb-0013724ff5a7</a>
dag_yoApr 2, 2006
Do you believe everything you read on the Internet?Look at the organization... *ahem*... Washington, DC lobbyists you're quoting:<a class="user" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Center_for_Public_Policy_Research">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Center_for_Public_Policy_Research</a>I'll spare you the entire article (a favor I'm sure the rest of the Digg.com community could have asked of you) and share some excerpts:"In 2002 ExxonMobil donated $30,000 for "educational activities" and a further $15,000 for general support. [3] (<a class="user" href="http://www2.exxonmobil.com/files/corporate/public_policy1.pdf)">http://www2.exxonmobil.com/files/corporate/public_policy1.pdf)</a> In 2003 the company boosted its general operating support to $25,000 with another $30,000 for 'global climate change/EnviroTruth website""In 1997, NCPPR opposed action on global warming at an international summit in Kyoto, Japan. It established the Kyoto Earth Summit Information Center, issued an "Earth Summit Fact Sheet" and fed anti-treaty quotes to the media through a "free interview locator service" that offered "assistance to journalists seeking interviews with leading scientists, economists and public policy experts on global warming.""Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, NCPPR began using the rhetoric of anti-terrorism to attack environmentalists. In May 2002, it created the Envirotruth web site, to attack what it called the "jihad" that environmental activists are waging against corporations."Just because it's on t3h iNtern3ts doesn't mean that it's not politically or economically motivated to present a certain point of view.Another funny thing you notice... Source Watch is completely user-editable. The National Center for Public Policy Research isn't. Just for grins, let's look at Wikipedia.<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming</a>Notice how a completely user-editable encyclopedia seems to contradict just about everything in your article? Do you think that's a coincidence?I suggest you take a debate class and perhaps a course on proper sourcing of materials--if only to prevent you from looking stupid in the future as you continue to quote anything you "found on google in less than a second." I'd be willing to bet that's about as much time as you spent analyzing the information you found for accuracy.
ellingswinApr 2, 2006
But now with technological advances, we are seeing hybrid SUVs. Probably not as much room as the current suburban, but it's a start.Ethanol is starting to get better, but the 85 percent requires special cars and it isn't practical for a large scale population.I don't see this country turning to alternative fuels for awhile. The average citizen usually buys used cars.It saddens me that it has taken this long to finally roll out the alternative fuels and the generations to come will have to pay for our mistakes.
slartdudeApr 8, 2006
Chevy= no good.
vito123Apr 12, 2006
Ford and GM were not around when the glaciers melted 10,000 years ago.These so called "environmentalists" are simply front groups trying to destroy this nation in anyway possible to create a socialist/communist regime. They start with smashing major companies in order to create a larger government, and turn the American people into socialist puppets. "Forget weapons of mass destruction, the real threat is the SUV" ??Would you prefer breathing .00002% of CO2 or having your head cut off by Abdul and his brother Achmed?