Sure that’s good but also extremely insubstantial in a mildly frustrating way. At least start from urging for a ban on the oil products themselves rather than having already talked yourself down to what amounts to pissing on a forest fire.
this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2024
132 points (98.5% liked)
News
21613 readers
5495 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
A ban isn't going to be suddenly imposed; it's going to look more like "we stop subsidies for fossil fuels, and end advertising for them, and phase them out over 20 years"
So he's asking for the first steps. Which is a good move.
I’m saying these first steps are too little, too late, though. We should be past this point by now. We banned advertising tobacco over 50 years ago, and we don’t have another 50 years to work with on climate.
The stances we take and the actions we push for should be reflective of the urgency this situation merits.
There is still coal, oil, and gas in the ground. There are forests yet standing. It might have been better to get seriously started a few decades ago, and we can't achieve zero-visible-impact at this point, but we can still change how hot it gets before temperatures stabilize.
I'd far prefer to be getting started now instead of never.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step but if you’re running from a tiger you may want to take quicker, and longer strides.
Yes, but if you haven't even taken that first step, take it.
Ok while you’re patting yourself on the back for your measured progress toward not being tiger food I’m going to keep shouting for people to run.
TIL: 1998 was over 50 years ago. Unless there was some place that banned it in the 70s?
From wikipedia. This is just from the section on US laws. That last part might be what you were thinking of.
In 1970, Congress took their anti-smoking initiative one step further and passed the Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act, banning the advertising of cigarettes on television and radio starting on 2 January 1971. In April 1970, President Nixon signed it into law.[61] The Virginia Slims brand was the last commercial shown, with "a 60-second revue from flapper to Female Lib", shown at 11:59 p.m. on 1 January 1971 during a break on The Tonight Show.[62] After the television ban, most cigarette advertising took place in magazines, newspapers, and on billboards.[60]
Smokeless tobacco ads, on the other hand, remained on the air until a ban took effect on 28 August 1986.[63][64] Even further restrictions took effect under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.
Passed in 1997, the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement bans outdoor, billboard, and public transportation advertising of cigarettes in 46 states.
Wow I didn’t expect the US to be so progressive with it, I was thinking of the EU ban that mostly got rid of the F1 tobacco sponsorships.
it’s going to look more like “we stop subsidies for fossil fuels, and end advertising for them, and phase them out over 20 years”
Except it's not going to look like that, because oil tycoons own all the legislatures.
The next climate summit will be in Baku, the capital city of the Petro-state of Azerbaijan.
Hence the need to push attendees to take actions like this, instead of expecting them to just happen on their own.
Yes, let’s ban ads. So they start advertising as clothing brands, mixtapes, and soft drinks.
Restrictions on advertising were a key part of the steps to sharply reduce cigarette smoking
We should ban funding for the UN instead, that organization produces nothing but hot air and corruption.