PR Firms Accused of Spreading Climate Misinformation for Fossil Fuel Industry; Australia’s Potential Regulatory Response

Climate Misinformation Campaigns Undermine Australia’s Climate Action, Senate Inquiry Hears

Climate misinformation is significantly hampering Australia’s progress on addressing climate change, experts testified this week before a Senate inquiry examining information integrity on climate change and energy.

False claims about renewable energy and fossil fuels continue to spread throughout Australia, shaping public opinion and potentially derailing climate policy. Common examples include unfounded assertions that offshore wind farms kill whales, electric vehicles catch fire more frequently than petrol cars, and that natural gas is a clean energy source.

“This is what climate misinformation looks like. These claims are common, influential and damaging,” said one expert who testified before the committee. “They’re often spread for a reason: to slow the uptake of clean alternatives to fossil fuels.”

The Senate inquiry is hearing evidence from officials, climate scientists and researchers about the scale of the problem and its effects on Australian politics. Testimony has highlighted that oil, gas and coal companies, along with public relations firms, are primary sources behind misinformation campaigns.

Research presented to the committee traced money flows between fossil fuel companies and PR agencies, revealing how commercial interests often supersede public welfare. In the United States, oil and gas lobby groups spent approximately A$1.5 billion on public relations and advertising between 2008 and 2018, according to analysis of industry tax records.

These campaigns go beyond simple advertising. PR firms frequently conduct polling, focus groups, and coordinate media strategies. A particularly controversial tactic is “astroturfing” – creating fake community groups to manufacture the appearance of grassroots support or opposition to climate policies.

For example, ahead of the 2012 U.S. presidential election, a campaign called “Energy Citizens” ran advertisements featuring supposed ordinary Americans supporting “domestic energy.” In reality, this was an astroturfing effort created by PR firm Edelman for the American Petroleum Institute, using hired actors rather than genuine citizens.

Similar tactics are evident in Australia. The group “Australians for Natural Gas,” which presents itself as a non-government organization, was reportedly established by the CEO of gas company Tamboran Resources with assistance from PR firm Freshwater Strategy.

Unlike the United States, Australia lacks robust disclosure requirements that would reveal how much fossil fuel companies spend on PR services domestically. However, climate communications charity Comms Declare has documented numerous Australian PR firms working for the fossil fuel industry.

Climate misinformation is particularly damaging because it erodes public support for necessary climate action. Research shows that repeated exposure to false information increases the likelihood people will believe it, even if they initially supported climate science.

“These campaigns can inflate the sense of opposition to climate action and give policymakers a false sense of how widespread support for climate action is,” explained one expert at the hearing.

The timing of the Senate inquiry is significant, coming shortly after the Australian government released its comprehensive report on escalating climate change risks facing the nation. The inquiry’s findings could inform potential regulatory responses to climate misinformation.

The problem has received international attention, with UN Secretary-General António Guterres last year calling on PR firms to “stop acting as enablers to planetary destruction.”

Some PR professionals are now advocating for their industry to sever ties with fossil fuel companies. The movement mirrors previous government actions restricting advertising for harmful products like tobacco, with some jurisdictions worldwide beginning to consider similar measures for fossil fuel promotions.

As climate impacts intensify, the Senate inquiry represents an important step in addressing how misinformation hampers Australia’s climate response. The key question remains: what regulatory frameworks might policymakers implement to address climate misinformation while respecting free speech principles?