Greenpeace now using dodgy infographics

The use of infographics is good, refreshing even, but of you are going to use infographics to prove a point then you could at least get them right.

Greenpeace is the latest organisation to use infographics and they are pretty good…at telling a story they want told.

They still lead readers down the proverbial garden path allowing them to see and ever increasing problem growing before them with going back to reference the original supposition. I also think their scale on the barrels in the second last image is deliberately wrong. If you use the little human that they have used as a guide then that human appears to be 3m tall as are the barrels of oil. This must be deliberate.

Then they leave out the human shape totally in the last image which is meant to represent the Deepwater Horizon spill. The scale is monstrously off in that image as well.

They totally fail to compare Deepwater Horizon with Rena. You see they are conflating issues to prove a point. We know DWH was an unmitigated disaster, no debate, but Phil Goff and the Greens and now Greenpeace are likewise calling Rena an “unmitigated disaster”. Except the scale is massively different.

I have added the total fuel load of Rena and using the Skytower as a reference matched the real size of the barrels and also left the speck that is a human at the bottom. Don’t get me wrong. Any oil in the water is bad, but if we are going to have infographics could we please have ones with proper scales. Greenpeace have deliberately increased the scale of the barrels compared with the height of the skytower.

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Alex

    It doesn’t actually matter that the scale is different, we have had a government that has shown that they can’t adequately respond to a relatively small oil spill, therefore we shouldn’t let them open up further areas of our water to oil drilling, where there could be a catastrophic spill.

  • I think you might have missed a step, they’re not suggesting that Rena is an “unmitigated disaster”, they’re showing that the Rena spill is tiny in comparison to what it would be like if an oil tanker had beached itself (pun intended, if not very good, or in particularly good taste); then that an oil tanker would be tiny in comparison to something like the DWH disaster.  I think they’re more saying “you think Rena is bad, imagine how bad it would be if…”

    Anyway, that’s just my read on it… :)

  • Greenpeace using dodgy statistics? Sheesh; I never saw that one coming!

  • Anonymous

    Greenpeace have it in their DNA to sensationalise most things. Yes this oil spill is not good at all . However we can always add to anything, imagine how bad it could be….

    If that was the case, I better not fly from Auckland to Napier this afternoon, because imagine if the plane crashed….

    Have heard the ex head honcho of Greenpeace present at a few conferences in the US of A, he is great to listen to…

  • In Vino Veritas

    And Alex, given that a massive meteorite might hit NZ sometime in the future, we best get a spaceship ready now, so we can intercept it and turn it away. Oh, and lets build huge walls around NZ since we could get hit by a tsunami. In fact, lets think of every bad thing that could possibly ever happen and prepare to the n’th degree for it.

22%