An Inconvenient Truth: Squeezed from Classrooms

JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
edited November 2006 in A Moving Train
http://consciousearth.blogspot.com/2006/11/inconvenient-truth-squeezed-from.html
Monday, November 27, 2006

An Inconvenient Truth Squeezed from Classrooms

The producers of An Inconvenient Truth have offered to supply American classrooms with 50,000 copies of the movie free of charge. That offer has been rejected by the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), the nation's leading science education teachers group, citing a risk to funding from key financial supporters.

One of those supporters is Exxon-Mobil.

The news was buried deep in the Washington Post website and reported by Laurie David, a producer of the film and founder of StopGlobalWarming.org

In their e-mail rejection, they (NSTA) expressed concern that other "special interests" might ask to distribute materials, too; they said they didn't want to offer "political" endorsement of the film; and they saw "little, if any, benefit to NSTA or its members" in accepting the free DVDs.

Gore, however, is not running for office, and the film's theatrical run is long since over. As for classroom benefits, the movie has been enthusiastically endorsed by leading climate scientists worldwide, and is required viewing for all students in Norway and Sweden.

Still, maybe the NSTA just being extra cautious. But there was one more curious argument in the e-mail: Accepting the DVDs, they wrote, would place "unnecessary risk upon the [NSTA] capital campaign, especially certain targeted supporters." One of those supporters, it turns out, is the Exxon Mobil Corp.


Oil industry supporters will be quick to endorse the decision, agreeing that An Inconvenient Truth does indeed represent a special interest. What they will conveniently ignore is that unlike industry friendly messages pushed into the curriculum, An Inconvenient Truth is based on, and endorsed by, objective science - the very subject the National Science Teachers Association says it promotes.

What truth is more inconvenient? It depends where your pay cheque comes from.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Those bastards.
  • kenny olavkenny olav Posts: 3,319
    Completely asinine.
  • i do remember a part where exxon-mobil was made to look like the bad guy in the movie, but fuck,... they don't give a shit about the environment.

    that is fucking ridiculous.
    you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
    ~Ron Burgundy
  • Sonja_SSonja_S Vienna Posts: 444
    Great to see that even education comes down to sponsoring now... Maybe another sponsor can be found who is willing to finance another way of getting the students to watch it.

    The Austrian green party organised free screenings especially for schools. Teachers can register their classes and then get a date for a screening at a local cinema. I will actually be responsible for the DVD release over here and I plan to pester the minister of education as soon as we have a new one (we just voted) and everyone else who may not want to listen to get the movie out there.
    You can tell a man from what he has to say - Neil & Tim Finn
    They love you so badly for sharing their sorrow, so pick up that guitar and go break a heart - Kris Kristofferson
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    Sonja_S wrote:
    Great to see that even education comes down to sponsoring now... Maybe another sponsor can be found who is willing to finance another way of getting the students to watch it.

    The Austrian green party organised free screenings especially for schools. Teachers can register their classes and then get a date for a screening at a local cinema. I will actually be responsible for the DVD release over here and I plan to pester the minister of education as soon as we have a new one (we just voted) and everyone else who may not want to listen to get the movie out there.

    How much, exactly, are voting and education intertwined in Austria?

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • Sonja_SSonja_S Vienna Posts: 444
    gue_barium wrote:
    How much, exactly, are voting and education intertwined in Austria?

    The parties who got the most votes (SPÖ and ÖVP) are currently negotiating to form a coalition government. If they manage to do so, the different departments are going to be assigned to one of the parties. For example, now education is headed by someone from the ÖVP, but the SPÖ wants that department in the future, so we don't know who will be responsible yet. That also concerns the senior staff members.

    The green party (Die Grünen) came out at 3rd place in this election and decided to stay in opposition (they could have negotiated to form a coalition with 2 other parties) along with the FPÖ and BZÖ who also got enough votes to get into our 'Nationalrat'. Every party has someone who ist responsible for educational matters though. So if for example the greens want to change something, they can bring forward a motion which will be discussed in parliament.
    You can tell a man from what he has to say - Neil & Tim Finn
    They love you so badly for sharing their sorrow, so pick up that guitar and go break a heart - Kris Kristofferson
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    Sonja_S wrote:
    The parties who got the most votes (SPÖ and ÖVP) are currently negotiating to form a coalition government. If they manage to do so, the different departments are going to be assigned to one of the parties. For example, now education is headed by someone from the ÖVP, but the SPÖ wants that department in the future, so we don't know who will be responsible yet. That also concerns the senior staff members.

    The green party (Die Grünen) came out at 3rd place in this election and decided to stay in opposition (they could have negotiated to form a coalition with 2 other parties) along with the FPÖ and BZÖ who also got enough votes to get into our 'Nationalrat'. Every party has someone who ist responsible for educational matters though. So if for example the greens want to change something, they can bring forward a motion which will be discussed in parliament.

    Thank you.

    The cause and effect of education is usually referred to the pocktbook in America, therefore, education is hardly worthy of anything mightier than the grade school bully.

    And property taxes.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • Sonja_SSonja_S Vienna Posts: 444
    gue_barium wrote:
    Thank you.

    The cause and effect of education is usually referred to the pocktbook in America, therefore, education is hardly worthy of anything mightier than the grade school bully.

    And property taxes.

    Anytime.

    We have a completely differnt system than the US or Canada. There are of course private schools, but the majority goes to public schools. We don't have different courses, but one class of up to 25 people stays together for the entire year (or for several years, depending on how many fail) and has the same schedule (with exeptions if there were for example different 2nd and 3rd languages chosen within one class).

    We also have different school types to chose from after elementary school and again 4 years later. The fees for university are a whooping € 300,-/semester which students complain about :rolleyes:

    When I was in school, the department of education paid for every class who wanted to see 'Schindler's List', so sometimes they do manage to do something that makes sense.
    You can tell a man from what he has to say - Neil & Tim Finn
    They love you so badly for sharing their sorrow, so pick up that guitar and go break a heart - Kris Kristofferson
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    Sonja_S wrote:
    Anytime.

    We have a completely differnt system than the US or Canada. There are of course private schools, but the majority goes to public schools. We don't have different courses, but one class of up to 25 people stays together for the entire year (or for several years, depending on how many fail) and has the same schedule (with exeptions if there were for example different 2nd and 3rd languages chosen within one class).

    We also have different school types to chose from after elementary school and again 4 years later. The fees for university are a whooping € 300,-/semester which students complain about :rolleyes:

    When I was in school, the department of education paid for every class who wanted to see 'Schindler's List', so sometimes they do manage to do something that makes sense.


    I wish I could add to the conversation, yet, I'm just baffled by this story. And it needs to be kept up to the top.

    Shindler's List is an incredible film.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • darkcrowdarkcrow Posts: 1,102
    how very sad! does this mean if a book company want to donate books about conservation and the environment that schools will lose their funding from companies that do the opposite?
    schools really do need proper funding.
  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    This story really bugs me.

    I remember hearing on a news program that in a Far East country that kids weren't being taught history correctly, in specific, the details of World War II, and instead they were taught that the U.S. were not allies and were not helpful to their country during the war. (It may have been Japan, but I'm really not sure).

    So, now we're going to falsify science being taught in schools just because it's not in agreement with what the corporate sponsers stand for? Do these Teachers Associations really need support of Exxon, I just wonder why the gov't isn't doing more, and instead we're forced to rely on dollars from corps instead.
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    darkcrow wrote:
    how very sad! does this mean if a book company want to donate books about conservation and the environment that schools will lose their funding from companies that do the opposite?
    No, it means this school board has the fear they may lose funding. This fear may be totally unfounded.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • qtegirlqtegirl Posts: 321
    surferdude wrote:
    No, it means this school board has the fear they may lose funding. This fear may be totally unfounded.
    Maybe not...

    I knew a person who served in a school board in PA. He said that only 0.3% of they annual budget came from the federal government, and a small percent as well from the state. Most of the funding came from property taxes in the district and fundraising. Like the original article noted, Exxon Mobil is one of the donors to the school, and they have been a long time deniers of climate change and global warming.

    I think the school board has good reason to believe that they Exxon would pull their funding if they decide to accept and show the movie.

    It's a shitty deal, but, unless the whole system of how schools are funded changes, the board's hands are tied.

    Unless, of course, hypothetically speaking, they do accept the movies and when Exxon pulls their funding, they go to the media and raise a huge sting that would embarass Exxon. That might work.
  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    surferdude wrote:
    No, it means this school board has the fear they may lose funding. This fear may be totally unfounded.

    Just found this today...
    "Laurie David, a producer of An Inconvenient Truth, reports that the National Science Teachers Association has rejected 50,000 free classroom copies of the movie, citing 'unnecessary risk upon the [NSTA] capital campaign, especially certain targeted supporters.' One of those supporters turns out to be Exonn-Mobil."

    This fear is unfortunately very founded.
  • BinauralBinaural Posts: 1,046
    Jeanwah wrote:
    http://consciousearth.blogspot.com/2006/11/inconvenient-truth-squeezed-from.html
    Monday, November 27, 2006

    An Inconvenient Truth Squeezed from Classrooms

    The producers of An Inconvenient Truth have offered to supply American classrooms with 50,000 copies of the movie free of charge. That offer has been rejected by the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), the nation's leading science education teachers group, citing a risk to funding from key financial supporters.

    One of those supporters is Exxon-Mobil.

    The news was buried deep in the Washington Post website and reported by Laurie David, a producer of the film and founder of StopGlobalWarming.org

    In their e-mail rejection, they (NSTA) expressed concern that other "special interests" might ask to distribute materials, too; they said they didn't want to offer "political" endorsement of the film; and they saw "little, if any, benefit to NSTA or its members" in accepting the free DVDs.

    Gore, however, is not running for office, and the film's theatrical run is long since over. As for classroom benefits, the movie has been enthusiastically endorsed by leading climate scientists worldwide, and is required viewing for all students in Norway and Sweden.

    Still, maybe the NSTA just being extra cautious. But there was one more curious argument in the e-mail: Accepting the DVDs, they wrote, would place "unnecessary risk upon the [NSTA] capital campaign, especially certain targeted supporters." One of those supporters, it turns out, is the Exxon Mobil Corp.


    Oil industry supporters will be quick to endorse the decision, agreeing that An Inconvenient Truth does indeed represent a special interest. What they will conveniently ignore is that unlike industry friendly messages pushed into the curriculum, An Inconvenient Truth is based on, and endorsed by, objective science - the very subject the National Science Teachers Association says it promotes.

    What truth is more inconvenient? It depends where your pay cheque comes from.

    Forgive my ignorance, but why do Exxon Mobil sponsor the education sustem?





    PEACE
    ~*~*~*~*PROUD EVENFLOW PSYCHO #0026~*~*~*~*

    *^*^*^*^*^*^*^RED MOSQUITO #2^*^*^*^*^*^*^*

    Dublin 08/06
    Katowice 06/07 London 06/07 Dusseldorf 06/07 Nijgemen 06/07
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    Binaural wrote:
    Forgive my ignorance, but why do Exxon Mobil sponsor the education sustem?
    Why do any corporations participate in charitable giving? There are a number of possible reasons ranging from goodwill in the community, tax deductions, interest in our educational system producing bright students to become future employees, etc...
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • qtegirlqtegirl Posts: 321
    Binaural wrote:
    Forgive my ignorance, but why do Exxon Mobil sponsor the education sustem?
    Sadly, because they wouldn't have enough funds otherwise. The company I work for routinely donates cash, computers, employee time (as mentors, buddies, volunteers) to local schools. Schools also have to resort to fundraising in order to be able to afford sports teams, the arts, etc. Exxon Mobil is just one of those companies. Whatever their motive is, it's irrelevant.
    I think what's more relevant to this discussion is why the government doesn't provide enough funds for the school so that they don't have to go out to corporations for charity.
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    Jeanwah wrote:
    Just found this today...
    "Laurie David, a producer of An Inconvenient Truth, reports that the National Science Teachers Association has rejected 50,000 free classroom copies of the movie, citing 'unnecessary risk upon the [NSTA] capital campaign, especially certain targeted supporters.' One of those supporters turns out to be Exonn-Mobil."

    This fear is unfortunately very founded.
    It's unfounded because it's not based on action either taken by Exxon or communicated that they would take. It is the school board saying "we fear this action may take place and don't feel the gains are worth the potential loss". But the potential loss is only based on fears not anything substantiated.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    surferdude wrote:
    It's unfounded because it's not based on action either taken by Exxon or communicated that they would take. It is the school board saying "we fear this action may take place and don't feel the gains are worth the potential loss". But the potential loss is only based on fears not anything substantiated.
    I didn't take it that way, but you make sense. It's too bad that the school won't take the risk, in the name of education.
  • BinauralBinaural Posts: 1,046
    qtegirl wrote:
    Sadly, because they wouldn't have enough funds otherwise. The company I work for routinely donates cash, computers, employee time (as mentors, buddies, volunteers) to local schools. Schools also have to resort to fundraising in order to be able to afford sports teams, the arts, etc. Exxon Mobil is just one of those companies. Whatever their motive is, it's irrelevant.
    I think what's more relevant to this discussion is why the government doesn't provide enough funds for the school so that they don't have to go out to corporations for charity.

    Thats ridiculous. I know America has never exactly been the 'nanny' state but to not sufficiently fund your country's education system is a poor reflection upon a government.
    ~*~*~*~*PROUD EVENFLOW PSYCHO #0026~*~*~*~*

    *^*^*^*^*^*^*^RED MOSQUITO #2^*^*^*^*^*^*^*

    Dublin 08/06
    Katowice 06/07 London 06/07 Dusseldorf 06/07 Nijgemen 06/07
Sign In or Register to comment.