Their control of English-language science publications is even greater. Abandon all notions of impartial climate science. In publish-or-perish academia, publishers rule professors. In the Bertelsmann-ElsevierHoltzbrinck legion march thousands of science journal editors. Regarding climate-related publications, scientific or otherwise, the market share held by these firms approaches monopoly.

Advertising opens a separate pathway for EU states to colonise Anglo-American culture. Many EU-based multinationals, including many “strategic” enterprises, sell wares into Anglo-American markets. To do so, they purchase advertising space from domestic media companies. The full list of European businesses Page | 18 buying such ad space would run into the hundreds and would include: IKEA, Christine Dior, Michelin, Heineken, DHL, and Bayer et al; plus many firms programmatically, irreversibly committed to the energy transition i.e., Shell, Electrolux, Renault, Volkswagen, Daimler and BMW et al.

A 2018 study of the largest 50 purchasers of American advertising named 5 European enterprises: AB Inbev, Louis Vuitton, Fiat, L’Oréal and Nestle. These firms each bought between $1.4 billion to $2.2 billion worth of ad space in the USA. They collectively handed over almost $10 billion to mainstream US media companies. The total sum moving from EU-based multinationals to the English-speaking world’s mainstream media must be some multiple of that. Furthermore, much of this money spools through the advertising subsidiaries of Publicis, Vivendi and Bertelsmann.

Ad campaigns influence the zeitgeist in incalculable ways. More importantly, this quantum of ad space buying necessitates close continuous contact between “strategic” European conglomerates and the inner sanctums of Anglo-America’s mainstream media. Such interactions present irresistible opportunities to advance the omnipresent, overarching climate agenda.

In addition to commercials, music, books, and academic papers – these firms also flood English-speaking markets with movies, video games, news articles and YouTube videos. Still, the cultural force these firms exert in the Anglosphere is weak compared to the influence they exert in western Europe where they are inseparable from their host governments’ information agendas. In Europe’s northwestern quadrant these same firms own well over a thousand mainstream television stations, radio stations, weekly magazines and daily newspapers. They also publish most educational material, and own outright four of the top journalism, media studies, and digital communication colleges.

The coordinated efforts of these firms, and associated government ministries, is formalised and solidified through entities like the aforementioned French Business Climate Pledge. Another example of structured centralization is the European Data News Hub – a joint venture of European agencies like AFP and the German News Service (DPA). The Hub disseminates news stories while stimulating internal discussion among members about pressing issues, notably “the environment.” DPA, in turn, is owned by 177 German media investors. DPA’s 1,248 employees work out of 95 offices, 41 of which are outside Germany. In addition, 12 state-involved German media companies belong to the hyper-active European Broadcasting Union where they join 8 Dutch, 4 French and 3 Swedish agencies.

To conceptualise these media conglomerates as anything but a unified bloc is a sociological error. These firms transfer assets from one to another in ways that require intimate protracted high-level contact. They engage in joint ventures with one another, and they have mutual memberships in trade associations and political initiatives. They often work for, and they are embedded within, the same interlocking network of European multinationals.

The greatest attractor pulling together Europe’s media giants is their common integration into their host national governments. Each firm is a de jure or de facto “strategic” enterprise operating in conscious, institutionalised tandem with its host government. Said governments are without exception openly and forcefully devoted to the climate-rationalised energy transition. Each firm, through word and deed, demonstrates authentic commitment toward advancing this energy transition; and they utilise the cultural assets at their disposal to press this agenda.

These media conglomerates sit at the nucleus of a tight policy compact encompassing scores of European government ministries, mega-banks, and manufacturing enterprises. Prominent among them are giant Page | 19 firms deeply vested into electro-mobility and renewable energy (Orsted, Bollore, Dassault, Volkswagen, Renault, Société Générale, Siemens, Deutsche Bank, Daimler, and Credit Suisse et al).

Unfortunately, the social movement in the Anglosphere resisting the climate agenda often imagines the climate crusade as being rooted in, and/or funded by, the Russian Federation or People’s Republic of China. They are barking up the wrong tree. Apart from lacking a motive, and apart from the lack of evidence for this allegation, Russia and China simply do not possess the capacity to implement such a comprehensive politico-cultural campaign. These two countries combined do not exert one percent of the sway on Anglo-America that EU states, and their attendant commercial enterprises, do.

A related error is the envisioning of Climate Change as a “Leftist” campaign. Climate Change was initiated by, and continues to be orchestrated by, sections of the European oligarchy (along with their similarly socially elevated allies from similarly resource-challenged metropolitan environs of Anglo-America). These folk are neither radical levellers nor sincere internationalists. They are elitist plutocrats and Europefirsters. The political ideology of this cohort is best described as “centrist” albeit with tendencies toward, and historical roots in, Eurofascism.

The oil-and-coal phaseout actually makes sound economic sense to West Europeans. They plan to build their way toward that long-cherished goal of European Energy Independence. They wish to overcome comparative economic disadvantages born of resource-poor homelands. With the same stroke, they hope that by occupying the ground floor of the energy transition they will dominate crucial future industries (electric cars, wind turbines, bio-fuel digestors, energy saving appliances et al). For Western Europeans Climate Change is win-win. Conversely, for Anglo-Americans this same energy transition spells a wholly unnecessary economic catastrophe.