A groundbreaking investigation into the interconnected workings of the U.S. fossil fuel-derived hydrocarbon industries, encompassing the oil, gas, plastics, and agrichemicals sectors, sheds light on the complex relationships among key players within these industries. The research, published in the open-access journal PLOS Climate on January 15, 2025, by Alaina Kinol from Northeastern University and her colleagues, reveals significant collaborations among nine preeminent organizations as they navigate the regulatory landscape surrounding environmental issues.
The study emphasizes the implications of these organizations leveraging social media platforms, specifically Twitter, to propagate coordinated messaging that often counters environmental regulations and initiatives. By analyzing over 125,300 unique tweets from the years 2008 to 2023, the authors delineated the digital interaction patterns of nine influential entities within the U.S. fossil energy, plastics, and agrichemical industries. These entities include the two largest U.S. fossil fuel companies—ExxonMobil and Chevron—alongside their national trade association, the American Petroleum Institute. Additionally, the analysis incorporated the top two producers of plastics—Dow and DuPont de Nemours, Inc.—with their trade association, the American Chemistry Council, as well as the largest agrichemical producers, Corteva Agriscience and FMC Corp, together with the American Farm Bureau.
The outcomes of this thorough examination unveiled that these nine organizations collectively posted 47% of the analyzed tweets, with plastics accounting for 35% of postings, and agribusiness at 18%. The study found that not only were these organizations extensively connected to one another, with every entity mentioned by at least four others in the analysis, but they also create a strong inter-sector coherence, especially between fossil fuel and plastics-related accounts. This interconnectivity implies a communal objective among these sectors to combat regulatory pressures and reshape public perception.
Moreover, the study documented the frequent engagement of external Twitter accounts featuring political figures and media outlets in discussions. In total, 112 unique media handles were mentioned, revealing the media’s critical role in representing and framing narratives surrounding these industries. This was followed closely by interactions with other organizations involved in hydrocarbons and petrochemical production (63 handles) and with politicians (43 handles). The significance of this dynamic presents a multifaceted approach to how industrial stakeholders seek to sustain their positions by utilizing social media as a tool for message amplification.
A notable aspect of the study was the identification of recurring themes within the tweets. The predominant phrases included “economy,” occurring in 3,140 tweets, highlighting an emphasis on economic arguments to bolster their positions. Other frequently mentioned terms were “sustainable/sustainability” (3,012 tweets), “pipeline” (2,862 tweets), “water” (2,350 tweets), and “EPA” (591 tweets). The strategic use of language reflects an intent to foster an image of environmental responsibility while simultaneously undermining regulatory efforts and climate science discourse.
These findings add a new layer to our understanding of how interconnected the fossil fuel and petrochemical industries are and their benedictive impact on environmental advocacy through digital discourse. As societal awareness of climate change intensifies, the research underscores the necessity for further inquiries into how these organizations collaborate to influence public opinion and policy-making processes.
Co-author Jennie C. Stephens articulates the critical implications of these interactions, asserting that the alignment of messaging across different sectors reveals a greater level of strategic coordination in climate obstruction than previously recognized. She emphasizes that disparate companies within these sectors utilize uniform approaches in promoting a misleading image concerning their environmental accountability, which can significantly impact climate policy and the public’s perception of environmental issues.
The study highlights the urgent need for climate advocates, policymakers, and the public at large to remain vigilant in scrutinizing the narratives propagated by these industries. By understanding the mechanisms of influence at play, stakeholders can better advocate for policy changes that address the pressing challenges of climate change.
In conclusion, Kinol et al.’s research presents compelling evidence that top organizations in the U.S. fossil fuel, plastics, and agrichemical sectors engage in a concerted effort through social media to resist regulatory reforms while manipulating public discourse. The interconnectedness of these industries reflects a collective strategy to maintain the status quo against environmental policies, necessitating a more conscientious and informed public response to their activities.
Subject of Research: An analysis of U.S. fossil fuel-derived hydrocarbon industries on social media.
Article Title: Networks of climate obstruction: Discourses of denial and delay in US fossil energy, plastic, and agrichemical industries.
News Publication Date: 15-Jan-2025.
Web References: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000370.
References: Kinol A, Si Y, Kinol J, Stephens JC (2025) Networks of climate obstruction: Discourses of denial and delay in US fossil energy, plastic, and agrichemical industries. PLOS Clim 4(1): e0000370.
Image Credits: None provided.
Keywords: fossil fuels, plastics, agrichemicals, social media, climate change, regulatory resistance, climate obstruction, environmental policy, public discourse.
