this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2024
979 points (99.4% liked)

News

23259 readers
3569 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. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


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
 

Even a majority of Republicans support efforts to hold manufacturers accountable for allegedly deceptive claims

Concern about the fossil fuel and plastics industries’ alleged deception about recycling is growing, with new polling showing a majority of American voters, including 54% of Republicans, support legal efforts to hold the sectors accountable.

The industries have faced increasing scrutiny for their role in the global plastics pollution crisis, including an ongoing California investigation and dozens of suits filed over the last decade against consumer brands that sell plastics.

Research published earlier this year found that plastic producers have known for decades that plastic recycling is too cumbersome and expensive to ever become a feasible waste management solution, but promoted it to the public anyway.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 112 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Remember in the 70s when the cigarette industry said their products were safe?

Remember in the 80s when the candy industry said it was the lack of exercise that was the cause of overweight?

Remember in the 90s when the gun industry pointed the blame to personal responsibility as the cause of school shootings?

Maybe just maybe industries can't self regulate. I can go on.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 30 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Whistleblowers should be treated like heroes. Like not just protections where the reward is that they get to keep their job working for a company that is probably going to feel hostile towards them, but reward them so that they don't need to work with that company anymore.

Publically funded science (done in the interest of the public rather than profit for universities or publishers) should also be ramped up so that it has the resources to examine these questions, too.

Also, criminal charges for execs that suppress information that prefers profits over safety.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The CTO of the previous company (1000+ employees , multinational) where I worked as an exec right under the CTO had a habit of not being able to keep his hands to himself. He was married but had a taste for men working under him.

Hed beeen around pulling shit for months until i was called in, i met him in person, he immediately started to "just tickle" me, and I reported his ass right away. Internal investigations were had and they fired him.

But not after allowing him as his final act to fire me because I was "not management material", had nothing to do with me blowing the whistle on him feeling up his employees. The company allowed him to do this because i was now a risk to them.

So the lesson here is to keep your head down, enable abusers, lest you want your career in the shitter

Edit: I fully agree with you, but the way it currently stands it's impossible to fight back to high level execs

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Sounds like a slam dunk lawsuit my dude.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

This is the way. If every company knew firing a whistleblower would result in a successful lawsuit against them, they would not do it anymore.

[–] ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml 24 points 2 months ago (1 children)

According to my brother, the real issue is that there is too much regulation and it is stifling the ability of ethical companies to break into industries 🙄

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I used to laugh at him yeah but he's managed to fuck up his kids with weird right wing capitalist stuff so it's less funny now

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

~~LOL~~ 😞...

[–] Strider@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

You missed cars. 😁

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 months ago

Pretty sure all those industries continue doing all that shit today

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Please go on, not that I need convincing, but would like to hear more, idk when was led? 60s?

[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 68 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Legislation on packaging should really be entertained as well. For many products a biodegradable form of packaging would be completely viable.

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 56 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Impossible, the only appropriate package for our premium scissors is comparably premium clamshell plastic. That you need scissors to open.

[–] TotalFat@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Imagine if they sold can openers inside sealed tin cans... And not the kind with the pull tab.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 28 points 2 months ago

All companies should be required to recycle their own products. No.. not via contracts with 3rd parties. Products go back up through the sales channels untill they reach the manufacturers.

If you don't have an idea how your products end of life works, you cannot sell or manufacture it.

Solves e-waste, plastic, chemicals.. a lot of the god awful stuff.

[–] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 17 points 2 months ago

But the Republicans are going to vote for the guy who will sell them down the river Jan 20st 2025.

Fucking.

Morons.

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Put a per gram tax on every manufactured product and watch how companies magically find alternative materials/methods to make goods.

[–] csm10495@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You mean: how they will raise prices to account for that.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 9 points 2 months ago

"They'll just raise prices" is corporate propaganda. Making them raise prices for carrying on using plastic is the whole point.

Other people will make packaging out of something else, and the people still stubbornly using plastic will see their sales go down.

You just have to make the tax large enough to encourage the use of other materials, and keep raising it once other materials become the norm. Otherwise you just see that 2.5% charge become a 5% price rise and everyone just carries on.

[–] WhatYouNeed@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Use to make machines for the plastic industry. None of them wanted tp use recycled plastic, because raw plastic pellets were cheaper and recycled plastic was harsher on the machines.

[–] spyd3r@sh.itjust.works 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Recycled plastic is also terrible if you have any type of quality standards you have to meet. You generally end up creating even more scrap because the regrind always has some amount of contamination in it, and never performs the same as virgin.

[–] WhatYouNeed@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Yep. When we made recycled units, the bearings got shredded and the drive motors got burnt out faster.

[–] tibi@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

That's why recycling goes after reduce and reuse.

[–] zik@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Recycled plastic is also inferior quality with worse structural properties so it's not really suitable for many applications.

[–] WhatYouNeed@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Yep, regrind was bad.

Not saying anyone shouldn't recycle. Just saying in our world of cheap is God, why fight?

[–] drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

We need to put some of these CEOs on trial like we did with the Nazi's hopefully all of them will get their just punishment.

[–] BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

I was just following orders.

[–] BenLeMan@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"Most US voters say" AKA Not Gonna Happen.

[–] doingthestuff@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Yeah we have a government that represents corporations.

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 14 points 2 months ago

Don't worry, the industry wants looser rules on what can be considered recyclable. They want to be able to label things as recyclable even if the majority of people do not have access to a recycling facility that can recycle it. Fuck them. Honestly, we should force them to be the ones to recycle the plastic if they want to label it as recyclable.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 months ago (15 children)

I would sooner hold out local municipalities who run the recycling centers and our investigative news agencies for not clearly informing the public that recycling plastic has not been the ecological solution we've been promised.

I mean, sure, the plastic producers lied but the recyclers have known about it this entire time too. How this has been such a secret for decades may suggest some deeper conspiracy.

And, if it's the case that our governments were genuinely unable to know this was an issue, we should be more critical of them for not knowing what other outside agencies are fooling them into using tax-payer dollars against our best interests.

[–] iltoroargento@lemmy.sdf.org 17 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The plastic producers were the ones pushing the grift and controlling the narrative/studies, just like what was done with fossil fuels and climate change (certainly a trend here with the oil industry).

Additionally, they're the ones that directly benefitted the most so it makes sense to go after their fraudulent gains.

I'm all for being critical of municipalities and elected officials, but the solution is not to bankrupt cities or state/federal funds through litigation. The focus should be on the producers. Go to the top of the chain/follow the money.

Edit: To your point about news conglomerates, that seems more viable and they certainly need better incentives and regulation.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Dude. It's been 40 years.

I didn't say news conglomerates. I said investigative news agencies - meaning the local news.

At some point over the past forty years, someone in government and someone at a local news paper has known there was a conspiracy. These people need to be held accountable. They're the ones who have cost tax payers hundreds of millions of dollars.

Granted, I may be giving too much credit to local government. I don't think most voters in the country care very much about electing people smart enough to put two and two together.

What I have such a hard time with is that people like yourself are so quick to excuse gullibility. The big powerful plastic company promised us it would be okay. Why would anyone dare question them or their motives? The fossil fuel company certainly has the public and the environment at their best interests. So many people are so quick to shrug and say "not my fault". Did you even attempt to ask questions or were you afraid that knowing the truth would be bad for your administration?

[–] iltoroargento@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh, totally, the portion I was speaking to was the issue of local news being owned by news conglomerates so that's where I see the grift coming from, mostly

And if we hold people personally liable, I'm more on board with that. I just would not touch taxpayer dollars for municipal, state, or federal funds with these suits.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago

local news being owned by news conglomerates

Yeah - I've watched the Sinclair segment. I recognize that but that's not the case everywhere. More troubling is how local newspapers are struggling and going out of business. I'm in Philadelphia where we still have decent locally-owned and/or operated journalism.

I'm not sure how the lawsuit would go down but I'd be open to whatever it takes to make the right changes. Perhaps the threat of digging into city coffers is precisely why nothing has happened in forty years. It's already costing tax payers millions of dollars every year to not recycle. I'd support millions to hold people accountable and make the needed changes if that means saving us money down the road.

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That has to do with fuckery around the term recycling. What normal people have been led to believe is only a very narrow definition of recycling and not what happens in most cases. Burning plastic is considered recycling as the waste is recycled into fuel.

Same with renewable energy.. sure the trees you chip down and burn can be regrown.. but that is not what people are led to believe is what they are being sold.

This is not on the local municipalities. They where saddled with waste and had to deal with it, they did as good as they could. And many people have been yelling about this since before 2000... It was just ignored untill microplastic where found in the balls and brain.

This along with big oil needs to be dragged infront of a tribunal and higher-ups from the last 40 years need to be held to account. We have room in the Hague.

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

They where saddled with waste and had to deal with it, they did as good as they could.

FOR FORTY YEARS?!

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Significantly reducing our reliance on plastics cannot be taken on as a single issue or at the local or even national level.

Plastics are a byproduct of the fossil fuel industry.

That’s the only reason materials which were marketed to people as miraculous in the 40s, 50s and 60s are so cheap.

The extraction industry is global, and the production of plastics is as well.

Even if one nation reduced its fossil fuel and plastic consumption significantly, there will be other nations that will take the opportunity to get that cheap energy, materials and industry.

[–] anindefinitearticle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Global solutions are nice to ask for, but not forthcoming. We can start by investing in alternatives at the local/national level, encouraging others to do the same, and advocating to grow an alternative way of living that is less extractive and more respectful. Ideas can spread quite quickly, if the conditions are right. A global switch isn't possible immediately. Infrastructure must be planned. International economic planning and international cooperation are low right now. Even intranational cooperation is low.

Cooperation grows from the bottom up, and we need to find something locally/nationally to agree on and cooperate over. Plastics and recycling being a unifying issue is hopeful to report, and is something that can be tackled at the local level. I have greatly reduced my own plastic consumption (it's not zero) and saved money doing it. Plastic products are usually expensive conveniences. Now I spend my days cleaning instead of just tossing and moving on. A part of the problem is that living well requires labor, and our society forces us to sell all of our labor energy to make a boss rich and pay us pennies. Further, we all live in atomized, nuclear units that must be self-reliant, which requires more labor to meet needs compared to the economies of scale involved with community-pooled labor to meet shared needs like food (a major source of plastics waste).

Previously, western society supported this structure via sexual segregation where one sex provided the labor to live well, and the other provided the labor donated to capitalism in exchange for the family unit being allowed to live. Then, the sex whose job it was to help us live well realized that they were being oppressed in this scenario, since they were being denied many basic rights of citizenship such as being seen as a person by society. They were tricked by the capitalists to demand that they may also donate their labor to the invisible hand in exchange for something closer to full citizenship. This creates a domestic labor vacuum that prevents pay parity. Domestic labor needs are being suppressed by convenience plastic use. The need for someone to do domestic labor causes women to fall back into this role due to the structural vacuum. Convenience plastics use is required to support the lack of time available now that Bosses demand double the labor from each family unit compared to the 1960s. Dropping plastics increases domestic labor requirements which exacerbates the sexual labor vacuum and pay gap. I see a local/national need to fix sexual issues as blocking a fix for our plastics addiction in the west. Abstracting the problematic societal structures around sex, calling them gender, and then breaking their rules is the current strategy to free ourselves.

[–] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

I disagree, but this is a cool reply and you should keep posting like this.

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Plastic recycling is a farce to make it appear as a “personal responsibility” issue.

Notice also how the labeling for plastics uses a sign that looks remarkably similar to a recycling logo - whether that specific type of plastic is actually recyclable or not.

It is all a public relation campaign, because fundamentally plastic is unsustainable and harmful. Governments have collectively shat the bed by placing the burden of dealing with plastic on the consumer. (This is very similar to the “carbon footprint” idea - which was a creation of the oil industry.)

I toured the place where my city collects its plastic recycling - the director in charge was very open about the fact that most of it isn’t used and can’t really be used anyway.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago

I mean, i get it, recycled plastic is harder to handle, etc. etc. But burning them for energy is no business?

load more comments
view more: next ›