Recap: Climate advertising in the midterm elections
With the midterm elections ending in just days, we look back at how climate + energy ads have evolved over this year
Welcome to Climate Monitor, a weekly digest of the digital tactics and strategies polluters and climate-action groups use to shift public opinion and move legislation. We’ve examined political ad spending on social media platforms, as well as what’s trending on social media. Tell your colleagues to subscribe here!
TL;DR:
Digital ad spending by climate groups grew steadily after Democrats passed the Inflation Reduction Act, and accelerated in the weeks leading up to Election Day.
Right-wing digital ads about energy almost all make the misleading argument that gas prices would go down if President Joe Biden would just “unleash American energy” - i.e., drill, baby, drill. That lie can be traced back to Big Oil talking points released just after the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
The biggest Meta ad spenders among climate groups so far this year have been NRDC, Science Moms, and Action for the Climate Emergency.
The biggest Meta ad spenders among polluters so far this year have been the American Petroleum Institute, the American Chemistry Council, and BP America.
To the best of our knowledge, climate groups have had an almost exclusive advantage when it comes to political ad spending on YouTube and Snapchat.
Last week was the last full week that advertisers could launch new political ads on Facebook and Instagram. Here were the top 25 spenders nationwide on climate and energy-related ads on Meta platforms:
The 2022 election cycle has been a big one for the American climate movement. In February, Russia invaded Ukraine and destabilized the global fossil fuel market, clearly illustrating how fossil fuel dependency chains everyone to the whims of OPEC autocrats. As the year dragged on, it looked likely that U.S. climate legislation would stall in Congress just like it did in 2021. But in August, Democrats surprised just about everyone and enacted the biggest investment in clean energy and the first-ever climate bill in American history, completely shifting the way climate groups and political candidates talked about these issues in the run-up to next week’s elections.
Literally two days after Russia invaded Ukraine in February, the American Petroleum Institute telegraphed their new talking points to anyone who was listening: “Unleash American energy.” Of course, Big Oil advocating for more domestic fossil fuel production is hardly new, but this message, along with the Trumpian “Make America energy independent again” quickly became the backbone of how almost all fossil fuel groups, Republican candidates, and conservative outside groups talked about energy production online this year. With this framing and millions of ad dollars to back it, climate deniers have marked Joe Biden’s openness to transitioning away from fossil fuels as the reason gas prices are higher than last year (never mind that production is back to pre-pandemic levels or that fossil fuel companies racked up record profits this year).
However, as readers of this newsletter are probably painfully aware, production at home is not the only way to break American dependence on fossil fuels from murderous dictators abroad. After the war broke out, a couple of climate groups used their digital ads to make the case that Russia’s destabilization of the global energy market was a prime opportunity to pass Biden’s Build Back Better agenda. Climate Power was the main driver of this argument online, and they would come to be one of the biggest online spenders among climate groups all year long. Other groups, like the League of Conservation Voters, the NRDC Action Fund, and the Environmental Defense Fund, spent the first six or so months of 2022 either pushing for BBB or talking up what few clean energy or environmental wins Democrats had scored up until July 27th.
Sens. Manchin and Schumer surprised everyone with the Inflation Reduction Act. The right-wing media machine was largely caught flat-footed, and since every Democrat in Congress got to Yes as quickly as possible, climate groups, particularly Climate Power and LCV, had the opportunity to start selling the bill’s provisions right away. And while Democratic candidates shifted their ad dollars to maximize their messages on abortion post-Dobbs, these groups became the main outlets for energizing (primarily young) voters as the election cycle progressed. In recent weeks, a wide constellation of climate groups has expanded their targets from the “Big 4” states of the cycle - e.g. Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and Wisconsin - to target competitive House and gubernatorial races.
Of course, not all digital ads from climate groups and polluters have followed the mood swings of Congress or the electoral cycle. One of the biggest Meta political ad spenders among climate groups was Science Moms, which led a huge months-long campaign throughout the summer educating moms in battleground states about the connection between climate change and extreme weather. And polluters have largely run consistent ad campaigns throughout the year. Energy Citizens, the grassroots brand of the API, has spent at least $1 million on ads throughout the year connecting fossil fuels to national security, while America’s Plastic Makers (a brand of the American Chemistry Council) and BP America have also spent $1 million-plus each on ads trying to paint greenwash either their brands or their products.
Overall, here’s how the top spenders on Meta political ads among these groups broke down up to this point this year…
And how much all of these groups spent on the platform so far this year:
From what we can tell, climate groups have far outspent fossil fuel groups on YouTube ads, especially in recent weeks. Like on Meta platforms, Climate Power Action and LCV Victory Fund make up a big part of that spending, but other groups like Wisconsin Conservation Voters, Climate Vote Minnesota, and Conservation Voters of Michigan have recently rolled out relatively big YouTube ad campaigns supporting Democrats and attacking Republicans in their respective states. Also selling the Inflation Reduction Act and its climate provisions has been Future Forward USA Action, which has been using the bill to boost President Biden’s approval ratings with younger voters. Finally, we’ll note that opponents and proponents of California Prop 30 have dumped more than $1.5 million on YouTube ads over the past couple of months, making them some of the biggest climate-oriented spenders on the platform.
Overall, here’s how climate groups’ and polluters' spending on YouTube ads has progressed week-over-week this year. It’s important to note that this doesn’t include YouTube ads from ExxonMobil, BP, the American Chemistry Council, et al. since the Google Transparency Report only captures ads that mention a specific candidate or ballot initiative. That said, the most active pro-fossil fuel group we’ve identified (other than multi-issue groups like Americans for Prosperity), has been Clearpath Action Fund, which has primarily used the platform to support Sen. Lisa Murkowski.
Following national trends, progressive climate groups had Snapchat ads practically all to themselves; all year long, we hardly ever found a pro-fossil fuel group that spent any money on the platform. Patagonia has been the biggest, most consistent spender on this platform with regular one-off campaigns promoting local conservation activism and education opportunities. But just like on other platforms, Climate Power, LCV, and the NRDC Action Fund have been the biggest spenders here, and they’ve been using their ads to sell the Inflation Reduction Act and support Democrats in highly competitive races.
Overall, here’s how much has been spent on climate, clean energy, and conservation ads on Snap so far this year:
That’s it for Climate Monitor this week. As always, if you have any comments or questions, feel free to drop us a line by shooting an email to nick@fwiwmedia.com.