(morsteen)
UPDATE: This post was based on a hoax perpetrated by the corporate pranksters/filmmakers the Yes Men, who put out a fake press release under the Chevron name. The quote attributed to Chevron in the post came from the fake release. Thanks to Sara for pointing this out.
Original post:
Angry that someone put up a hoax site that mocks Chevron’s “We Agree” ad campaign, which is meant to convince customers big oil should take responsibility to cleaning up its environmental disasters, Chevron put out a press release that declares it’s out for virtual blood.
Here’s the fake site, which calls for the company to “support small business,” “put profits to good use” and get “behind the development of renewable energy.
And here’s the less-exciting real site, in which Chevron says only that it agrees oil companies should clean up their own messes.
Chevron’s lawyer says in a statement:
“Chevron does not take this attack lightly. We invest extremely heavily in our campaigns, and we take them extremely seriously. Such actions can never be tolerated.”
He adds:
“This hoax is part of an ongoing effort to blame Chevron for 18 billion gallons of toxic waste dumped in the Amazon during drilling operations,” said Rhonda Zygocki, Chevron vice president of Policy, Government and Public Affairs. “This blame game continues despite Chevron’s long-standing agreement with the Ecuadorian government which very obviously puts the issue behind us.”
More From Consumerist
-
Convenience Store Owner Calls Cops On Unruly Customer, Ends Up Getting Arrested
-
Pranksters Prey On The General Public's Love Of All Things Apple By Pretending To Drop iMacs
-
Walmart: Prices So Low, We Have To Raise Them To Put Things On Sale
-
Pizza Hut Manager Has Good Sense Of Humor, Honors 20-Year-Old Coupon
-
California Relaxes Smog Controls In Effort To Bring Down Gas Prices
the Yes men at it again?
Looks like it!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/18/chevron-gets-pranked-with_n_767094.html
“This blame game continues despite Chevron’s long-standing agreement with the Ecuadorian government which very obviously puts the issue behind us.”
Hmmm….
I see – because a few corporate executives and some officials from a foreign government signed an agreement, that makes it all okay and the whole thing has just gone away – and we should all just shut up, not talk about it anymore and move on.
They didn’t really say they didn’t do it, just that oh, thats behind us now…
Clearly behind us! Why can’t you stop muck raking poor Chevron’s past?
Thus solving the problem once and for all.
But…
ONCE AND FOR ALL!!
What PR spokesman talks like that? Seriously, obvious fake is obvious. Wow, you’d think a blog would such stellar connections would stoop so low.
The only leg Cehvron has to start on, legally, is that this this purposely makes it seem like they are, in fact, the Chevron corporation. That could be construed as, at the least, brand confusion, and at the most outright fraud.
But it’s parody, so Chevron should just go fly a kite.
Stand on*
….wait…..how do you turn a phrase?
I don’t see how this is parody.
How is this not a parody? Parodies mock and make comments about the original work. This is exactly what happened.
Because this is a *hoax,* not a *parody*. As mentioned, *parody* must be easily distinguished from the original material.
“Eat It” is parody.
A white guy singing “Beat It” is not.
‘Men at Work’ is a satirical representation of blue-collar workers (and an Indian).
Dressing up as a cop, pulling people over, and issuing fake tickets is not.
Using official graphics, official trademarks, images… I don’t see how this is a parody.
Parodies change things up, poke fun at or go in a hugely different direction. This is a fake site that’s under guise of being an official site with the company’s trademarked logo. Not a parody.
Saying “parody” doesn’t mean you get to build a site under somebody’s name and trademark and you’re instantly protected. There’s a reason a lot of parody either A) changes up the names or B) makes it apparent it’s not ENTIRELY legit (the Onion).
Preyfar: I don’t see how this is a parody.
When they told you that you’d passed the bar, it was because it was actually a drinking establishment.
Your lack of a sense of humor is not proof of a lack of parody in the site.
I agree that it’s parody, but I think (IANAL) to stand up in court, a parody has to have little chance of being mistaken for the real thing.
Chevron, why so defensive? If you are truly in the right and have adequately made up for all of the lives you destroyed, then you should have nothing to worry about. Especially if you have paid off local governments to turn a blind eye to such things.
They aren’t defensive. This is a fake.
Is it just me, or does it look like Chevron is running the “FAKE” site, too? there’s no mention of calls for the company to “support small business,” “put profits to good use”
Maybe Chevrons lawyers threats got them the “KEYS” to the fake site? There is no link to the “press release that declares it’s out for virtual blood.” in the article, either.
Obvious mistake in this article:
Phil wrote: “Here’s the fake site, which calls for the company to “support small business,” “put profits to good use” and get “behind the development of renewable energy.”
Then: “And here’s the less-exciting real site, in which Chevron says only that it agrees oil companies should clean up their own messes.”
Actually, the real site says oil companies should “support small business,” “put profits to good use” and get “behind the development of renewable energy.”
The fake site says (among other things) that oil companies should clean up after their own messes, stop endangering life, etc.
Mistaking one site for the other kind of misses the entire point of the parody. Oh well.
Call me confused, but the “real” site is at chevron.com/weagree
How could a site at chevron.com be a “fake” site?
Answers, anyone?
That was the problem with the way Phil wrote this article. He confused the real site with the fake site in his descriptions, but not in the links. i.e. He said “here is a link to the fake site where the pranksters said Chevron supports small business” and while the link does go to the fake site, there is nothing about supporting small business or any of the other things he attributed to the fake site. The only things on the fake site are the things he said were on the real site, if that makes sense.
Another top-notch article by Phil!
/sarcasm
I’m stunned – STUNNED, I say – that Phil has posted a poorly written article.
+1, I was confused by the way it was written as well.
Taking it *extremely* seriously, huh? Well, that moves it from taking it seriously level yellow to taking it seriously level orange
Here’s the fake site, which calls for the company to “support small business,” “put profits to good use” and get “behind the development of renewable energy.
And here’s the less-exciting real site, in which Chevron says only that it agrees oil companies should clean up their own messes.
You got the sites backwards, Phil.
OR DO YOU?!?!?!?!?
Well, they’ve got a whole fake press release there, using actual employee names, and mixing real and fake links. The only way you can know what’s legit is by looking closely at the URLs. This goes beyond parody, they’re clearly trying to get people to think that the material comes from Chevron. It’s clearly cybersquatting.
That may be a mistake calling out the jokers. The real meanies (like 4chan) might come out of the woodwork and start hammering on their systems.
Doubt it – 4chan is pretty libertarian leaning.
4ch isn’t *ANYTHING* leaning. If you think 4ch is some monolithic entity, you don’t even understand the most basic of principles involved.
Bwahahah, thanks Chevron lawyer for reminding people what it is they’re not supposed to be reminded about. +1 gold star.
Yes, that’s what I was thinking! “This issue is obviously behind us! You know, the issue where we screwed over the Amazon? You know, the toxic waste dumping issue? OK, yeah, you remember now. Well, just forget about it — it’s all behind us!” Nice PR work, Rhonda.
Oh, because the press release isn’t actually from Chevron. That, too, is a hoax. Good job on the research!
“Chevron says only that it agrees oil companies should clean up their own messes”
The largest oil spill and they can only agree that oil companies should clean up their own messes? They aren’t even doing that well, blaming everyone but their greedy company and policies for the mess.
I just want my life back.
/sails into sunset on massive yacht
Sorry, I thought this was about BP. My fury hath clouded my mind.
Also, that press release Phil quoted was fake too. This is incredibly sloppy work.
The press release was from this site:http://press.chevron-corp.com/ which is not actually affiliated with Chevron. Didn’t it seem odd that their PR flack would specifically mention the Amazon incident?
The real press release from Chevron:
“Chevron’s new advertising campaign is meant to identify and highlight common ground on key energy issues so we can move forward safely, intelligently and collaboratively. Unfortunately, there are some that are not interested in engaging in a constructive dialogue, and instead have resorted to rhetoric and stunts. Today, activist groups have attempted to interrupt the conversation by issuing a fake press release and establishing a counterfeit website, which are not affiliated with Chevron.”
This seriously took about two minutes of internet detective work. I really hope the editors at this site work on an unpaid, volunteer basis.
Ugh! Wow. I can’t feel bad for Phil now. This is blatantly poor. Phil Fail.
Maybe Ben will write an article: “Consumerist bloggers suckered by hoax! Here’s the real story!”
Please Ben? Pretty please?
I usually stick up for Phil…but this is pretty bad
Wow… just wow.
“I really hope the editors at this site work on an unpaid, volunteer basis. “
This.
I don’t think it’s as much a hoax as it is political satire. I don’t believe they are doing anything illegal or wrong, and in fact, I encourage many many more websites like this.
If it wasn’t a hoax why did Consumerist fall for it?
They deserve the ribbing, in my opinion. I used to work for a big online ad agency and this is exactly the sort of campaign we might’ve done. If you want to appear genuine as a company, a bunch of slick-looking stuff from an ad agency may not be the best route.
Well bully for Chevron. I’m glad they and the Ecuadorian government put the issue behind them.
I’m sure the people effected by the spill of 18 million gallons of oil are just as happy to just say, “bah, oil under the bridge. S’all good yo!”
Ugh.
That’s Billion with a “B”. A million gallons sucks, but it was ten-fold.
Right, right….I need to finish my first cup of coffee before I read this site.
The press release is fake.
Jesus Phil….its like you are TRYING to screw up. Way to mix up the parody, real site, and press release. Now I really have NO idea WTF is going on with this story. Cant wait until the Phillies lose only because it will annoy you, like I am annoyed every time i have to read one of your ill-prepared, non-edited posts. Please Ben….save us from this mind-sucking terror.
Do what I do – read his posts for the entertaining comments. The actual content of the post I ignore unless the comments fail to please – and here they have.
“Look, we paid good money to that government to shut them up, and here you guys go trying to dredge up old problems again. Let’s just put the past behind us and pretend there were no ramifications!”
Did the sites change since this was posted? They don’t seem to match their descriptions in the article at all. (“fakje” one says nothing about small businesses, real one does, etc)
Read my other comments, posted above. Basically, Phil made some glaringly obvious mistakes when “writing” this “article.”
it shouldn’t take a whistleblower to reveal the truth
Where’s the “flag for review” button for articles? This needs to be pulled pronto.