Photo-News Publishes Disinformation From the American Chemistry Council
The full page advertisement wasn't labelled as an ad, and no additional context was provided by the paper about its contents.
Updated 3/28/25: For the second year in a row, Straus News has continued to run these deceptive ads in the pages of their Photo-News. All while bragging about a recent award they got for their local journalism. What a class act.
Updated: 5/31/24 at 12pm: For the second week in a row, Straus News has run the advertisement addressed below. This ad is not clearly labeled as an advertisement, which is a violation of the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, and best practices for media outlets. We here at The Monroe Gazette follow the SPJ’s Code of Ethics to the letter.
Please be on the look out for this deceptive ad, and tell Straus News this kind of behavior won’t be tolerated during a time of heightened misinformation plaguing the American public.
I know, times are tough for everyone.
That’s why I’m looking to hit 100 paid subscribers to The Monroe Gazette by August 1st. If I hit that number, I know that this project is financially viable to continue. But one thing I won’t do is accept any advertising.
I believe that accepting advertising compromises the editorial integrity of the media outlets that carry it.
If you don’t believe me, check out how much of the corporate news media covered Earth Day this year.
Or how they barely cover stories from the perspective of American workers like this one.
Accepting advertisements puts you in a position where you then can’t cover stories that will upset those advertisers.
And we already know The Photo-News doesn’t want to upset anyone based on what went down earlier this year.
So, let’s take a look at this advertisement.
I don’t usually look, or read, The Photo-News anymore. So credit goes to my Dad who saw this ad and started asking me about it this morning:
Nothing in this ad is true!
The Photo-News took money from the American Chemistry Council and their agency (whom placed the ads) and published it regardless.
They then ran this advertisement and also did not produce any sort of context or additional information to fact check the claims made by the American Chemistry Council.
The full page ad is also not labeled as an ad beyond the acknowledgement at the very bottom, which is in a color that makes it difficult to read.
For example, my Dad is color blind. So he could not see that label at the very bottom that identified who paid for the ad.
So, yes, I understand it may not be standard practice at The Photo-News, and other publications, to clearly label advertising, but that standard is no longer valid. The Society of Professional Journalists agrees and encourages publishers to clearly label all advertising.
If it’s an advertisement, it has to be clearly marked as an advertisement.
You and I can debate The Photo-News’s approach to Journalism (Boring) vs. My approach to Journalism (Fun). That’s a totally fair argument to have. There are a lot of different approaches to journalism. No one approach is better than the other, they’re just different.
But that’s not what we’re talking about here.
What we’re talking about is running a full page advertisement, that’s not readily marked as an ad, and not presenting any additional context or fact checking on an important issue.
And let’s be clear: There is no bigger story than the planet’s climate emergency. It affects all of us. Even if you don’t believe it’s happening, or that your messiah is going to come and somehow bail you out.
The planet is warming. The water is rising. The storms are getting worse.
And while I understand times are tough for media outlets, I don’t believe they should use that as a reason to run advertisements like this.
It’s not up to me. But if it was? There’s not a chance I’d let an ad like this run in any media outlet, anywhere in America. Let alone right here in Southern Orange County.
So, Let’s Do Some Fact Checking
The American Chemistry Council is the lobbying arm for companies including Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell, Total and BP, Bayer, BASF, FMC and Corteva.
ExxonMobile, as a frame of reference, is the 6th most profitable company in the world with $55.7B in profit in 2023.
It would take you 30 years to stack $1 bills in order to reach one billion dollars.
Translated: These companies have plenty of money.
They are not Mom and Pop companies that will be impacted by this bill.
These are (almost exclusively) companies that lied about the impacts of Climate Change as far back as the Johnson administration, and to this day, want to frame climate issues as something consumers can “fix” by “being green” instead of changing their policies and products.
So, when they tell you costs are going to go up, what they really mean is, their profit margin is going to go down.
This New York State bill will NOT:
Lead to fewer choices in terms of burgers and cheese slices.
Make products more expensive (unless, of course, these companies want to jack up their prices. In which case, you can and should report them to the DOJ immediately.)
Will not hurt any local business in any way, shape, or form.
What Does This Bill Do?
In the senate, the bill is known as 2023-S4246B. You can check it out here.
The summary states, “Enacts the "packaging reduction and recycling infrastructure act" to require companies selling, offering for sale, or distributing packaging materials and products to register with a packaging reduction organization to develop a packaging reduction and recycling plan.” (Emphasis Added.)
More specifically:
“The Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act would require companies with net income over $1 million who sell or distribute certain materials and products to reduce packaging, improve recycling and recycling infrastructure, financially support municipal recycling programs, and reduce toxins in packaging. This legislation shifts the onus of recycling from municipalities and ensures that producers of products are serving our interests by establishing solutions to sustainable packaging. Thus far, four states have implemented similar programs including Maine, Oregon, Colorado and California. New York State must follow suit to meet the moment for environmental accountability.”
Put another way - This bill should, on paper at least, save taxpayer money by freeing municipalities from having to recycle these products.
For more information about this bill, and why you should support it, I hope you’ll check out this explainer from Inside Climate News.
The League of Women Voters in New York, among other organizations have come out in support of this bill, and I hope you do as well.
As far as The Photo-News goes, they don’t often like publishing letters to the editor anymore. Especially ones that make them look bad, so instead of doing that, you can email their publisher, Jeanne Straus.
Ask her not to run advertisements like this in the future without clearly labeling them and providing the appropriate, impartial context. Otherwise it’s a disservice to both readers of the paper and the larger community: nyoffice@strausnews.com
A sample letter is included below:
Email: nyoffice@strausnews.com
Subject: Please Clearly Label All Advertising
Body:
Dear Jean,
For the second week in a row, The Photo-News published an advertisement from the American Chemistry Council, a lobbying arm of companies including Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell, Total and BP, Bayer, BASF, FMC and Corteva. Some of the wealthiest companies on the planet.
This advertisement was not clearly labeled as an advertisement, and the sponsor of the advertisement is hidden in a color that makes it difficult to read. I believe this was an intentional choice by the designers of the ad.
While you are free to run whatever advertising you’d like, I am writing to remind you that the Society of Professional Journalists has a code of ethics that states journalists and publishers should, “Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two. Prominently label sponsored content.”
Considering the current state of media literacy in America (poor), and the flood of disinformation and propaganda online by Russian Intelligence (as detailed and verified in The Mueller Report) and other bad actors, it’s your responsibility to make sure advertisements are properly labeled as advertisements. It’s not enough anymore to assume that someone will view this ad and recognize that it is an advertisement and not an official endorsement of a position by your newspapers.
If you are going to continue to run advertisements like this one, please make sure they are clearly labeled as an advertisement. Not doing so is a disservice to the community you serve and often ask for donations from.
(Your name here)
Updated 3/28/25: Below is the 2025 version of the same deceptive ad:
Excellent story! I didn't think I was color-blind but I also couldn't find or read who was sponsoring the ad. I will be writing to Ms Strauss.