by c_ris on 10/7/23, 10:17 AM with 225 comments
by dottjt on 10/7/23, 12:27 PM
It was the build up to the AFL grand final and there was a presenter on a football field with kids kicking footballs in the background.
Anyway, he introduces the segment and it turns out it's a paid promotion for Shell. The show then cuts to a 2 minute promotional video for Shell fuel.
Once the promo ends, he tells the kids that whoever kicks a goal gets a $1000 petrol voucher, as he waves a stack of these petrol vouchers in front of the camera.
I don't get easily offended, but I've honestly never seen anything more disgusting in my entire life.
by whatever1 on 10/7/23, 12:35 PM
Don’t ask the West. Ask India that had the choice to leapfrog fossil fuels and be energy independent, at higher cost.
People don’t care about our opinions. They want the cheapest options.
The only way to transition out of fossils for energy, is to make the alternatives cheaper and easily accessible. US transitioned from coal to gas within 10 years when the economics became favorable.
by acomjean on 10/7/23, 11:49 AM
I guess having companies build out maps and use their assets was going to be a side effect of having user created content.
Company sponsored games aren’t new (80d had 7up-spot and cool-aid man). One of this years biggest movies is a doll brand. However I don’t think they’re fooling anyone.
by IgorPartola on 10/7/23, 12:18 PM
The kicker at the end of the presentation: Sponsored by Exxon Mobile.
by DoingIsLearning on 10/7/23, 12:30 PM
Both BP and Shell are likely aware of this and are now trying to target public transport advertisement and online communities, where they think they will probably win over Gen Z.
by defrost on 10/7/23, 10:36 AM
by Alifatisk on 10/7/23, 10:30 AM
by tomp on 10/7/23, 11:00 AM
Green movement has spent the last 50 years opposing nuclear power, otherwise we would have decarbonised at least 90% already (like France has).
by sickcodebruh on 10/7/23, 12:58 PM
They announced to the staff one day that they landed a deal with Shell to produce videos about their science investment initiatives. I was disturbed by this and had chats with various decision makers. I was told that it would have a positive impact and celebrate the good investments, which would encourage Shell to do more good things! I wish I wrote down details, it was ridiculous. But they went ahead and did it. Shell never exerted any control over other content and all the news/editorial people were smart and committed, but this left a bad taste in my mouth about the company for the rest of my time there.
by boringg on 10/7/23, 11:51 AM
by haunter on 10/7/23, 11:09 AM
Quite a statement tbh. I thought it’s all Minecraft and Roblox?
And even then “only care about” are very strong words
by snthd on 10/7/23, 12:48 PM
https://www.spellingmistakescostlives.com/single-post/hell-i... (embeds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z64LV-BSwDs)
>One of the most polluted areas on the planet, the Niger Delta has a life expectancy of just 41 years due to decades of Shell oil spills & constant gas flaring.
by ccvannorman on 10/7/23, 1:31 PM
Shell Stations US
or
Shell Station Sus
Yep, pretty sus alright. I'm sure a lot of the target audience is laughing about this.
by andix on 10/7/23, 1:03 PM
Big oil never had to advertise the "benefits" of fuel, people just bought it. This slowly starts to change. And oil companies are crapping their pants, because in some countries a significant amount of cars on the roads will be EVs within a few years.
In Europe some corporations already switched to a 100% EV company car policy. All new leases need to be electric only, and within 3 years they will have >90% EVs in their passenger car fleet.
by jmyeet on 10/7/23, 11:47 AM
If you’re going to get upset about anything in games, get upset about loot boxes. Promoting gambling to children should be illegal. That’s psychologically damaging.
by monstertank on 10/7/23, 2:52 PM
All is fair in love and war.
by notsound on 10/7/23, 12:54 PM
by ravenstine on 10/7/23, 11:20 AM
by JumpinJack_Cash on 10/7/23, 12:41 PM
So if you think quality of life = cool ,
then it's true that fossil fuels = cool.
Don't let any private jet flying tech CEO or yacht enthusiast actor tell you otherwise. They want to brainwash you to have the exclusive on fossil fuels consumption much like they want to brainwash you to pay the maximum amount of taxes while they structure their affairs through trusts in Puerto Rico, Curacao or St. Kitts and Nevis.
Keep that foot on the pedal, they have much more to lose than we have, for once that's an advantage, if they are really so scared of climate change they'd move to Tibet or the Rockies.
by frob on 10/7/23, 12:41 PM
by jaygray0919 on 10/7/23, 5:46 PM
by rabbits_2002 on 10/7/23, 11:31 AM
by myshpa on 10/7/23, 12:16 PM
by bad_user on 10/7/23, 11:14 AM
> one of the many entities directly responsible for destroying our planet
Do any of you believe this narative?
Honest question: isn't the destruction of the planet due to the 8 billion people that have to be fed, clothed, housed, entertained? Aren't fossil fuels directly responsible for the industrial revolution and people not starving anymore?
I get that "Big Oil" might have delayed some reforms, but isn't the elephant in the room the 8 billion people that still need to be fed, clothed, housed, and entertained?
by danbruc on 10/7/23, 11:22 AM
Sure, spreading oil propaganda and trying to influence policies despite very well knowing of the negative consequences is bad, maybe even evil behavior. But making it sound like Shell singlehandedly destroyed the planet is just ignorant. Without us, the consumers, and our desire for the products made from that oil and gas, Shell would not have pumped a single barrel out of the ground or sunk an oiltanker somewhere in the process. The convince of having a car, consuming cheap electricity, getting plastic toys from China delivered across the globe the next day and spending your holiday at the other end of the world is what destroyed the planet.