Power company money flows to news sites that attack their critics

https://www.npr.org/2022/12/19/1143753129/power-companies-florida-alabama-media-investigation-consulting-firm

by danso • 4 years ago

279 89 4 years ago

mikeyouse2• 4 years ago

This is an important subject - there is something deeply rotten in the utility world in the South. There are a bunch of stories you wouldn't think are connected, but all have major utilities in the background. From 'fake news' sites set up to smear candidates, to huge bribes paid via nonprofits, to sham candidates backed by the utility running in close elections, to capital plans that include hundreds of millions of dollars in case of snow in Miami.. I really hope the FBI is working on this;

* Ex-Florida senator charged in fake candidate scheme (https://apnews.com/article/miami-senate-elections-florida-el...)

* Florida’s dark money playbook: How ‘ghost’ candidate scheme revealed secretive political tactics (https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-ne-dark-money-ghost-...)

* Firm working for FPL took control of news site, let execs influence coverage, records show (https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/florida/os-ne-fpl-matrix-c...)

* Nonprofit funded with FPL cash backed DeSantis’ 2018 campaign (https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2022/09/06/no...)

* Joel Greenberg alleged far-reaching public corruption in Florida jailhouse interview (https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2022/09/07/jo...)

* Leaked: US power companies secretly spending millions to protect profits and fight clean energy (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jul/27/leaked-u...)

* Tom Fanning Southern Company Matrix Scandal: What don’t we know? (https://www.energyandpolicy.org/tom-fanning-southern-company...)

* FPL’s extreme winter plan would create 'unnecessary' costs to consumers, critics say (https://www.palmbeachpost.com/story/business/2022/06/28/flor...)

woodruffw• 4 years ago

Thanks for collecting these. It's interesting that these issues don't (appear) to plague larger utilities like the TVA[1], which seems to be actively exploring and developing renewable projects.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_Valley_Authority

mikeyouse2• 4 years ago

Yeah, I'm not sure what it is about the TVA -- feels almost like DARPA in a way. Something about the staffing and organization has led to a model utility. They're not without minor scandal occasionally but given the amount of political power they wield, maybe it's the distinction that TVA is government-owned and NextERA (who runs FPL) and Southern Company are both for-profit corporations?

eclarkso• 4 years ago

Don't forget:

* $10B+ wasted on completely failed SC nuclear plant, which basically led to its collapse and subsequent buyout by out-of-state (Dominion) utility https://apnews.com/article/sc-state-wire-south-carolina-busi...

* GA version is still lurching to completion... at cost now approaching $30B https://www.ajc.com/news/as-vogtles-nuclear-units-move-towar...

bilbo0s• 4 years ago

Vogtie really is going to scare a lot of people off from nuclear for a very long time. I think ultimately, the federal government will need to assume responsibility for the construction and operation of nuclear plants. And when future generations look into why that is, Vogtie will be right up at the top of the list of reasons.

cool_dude85• 4 years ago

FPL (through a third party) also hired a private investigator to follow around a local opinion columnist because he was writing articles against the proposed privatization of Jacksonville's municipal utility company.

https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2022/06/24/fpl...

metaphor• 4 years ago

Also worth mentioning the related scandal[1] of JEA's former CEO and CFO attempting to sneak in a "Long-Term Incentive Performance Unit Plan" that would have paid out hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars as bonuses to executives if "a recapitalization event (including a sale of JEA) occurred, meaning payouts would have been funded by net proceeds to the COJ from the sale of JEA."

Entirely unsurprising who the top private bidder was[2].

[1] https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2022/03/07/for...

[2] https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/08/26/nex...

chaostheory14• 4 years ago

It’s probably not just power companies. I would be surprised if Wall Street firms and other large industries didn’t also do this practice.

https://www.openculture.com/2014/09/conspiracy-theory-rock.h...

Media bias is a big problem.

SQueeeeeL3• 4 years ago

How could media bias be a problem in a free market like the USA? Obviously all consumers will simply stop consuming news media that gets sponsored by big evil corporations and only support those who advocate for free open truth.

Wait, what do you mean every major news organization in the US is owned by billionaires or media conglomerates, dang, we didn't free market hard enough.

WalterBright3• 4 years ago

How could media bias be a problem in a free market like the USA?

Every media is biased. The free market solution is to allow anyone to be a media company, so the various viewpoints are available.

we didn't free market hard enough

You being free to post your views here is evidence the free market is working.

klyrs2• 4 years ago

Adam Smith was pretty clear that monopolies were antithetical to what he called a free market. If consumers had a choice, they'd consume different news, under his theory. But the market is captured by a small handful of billionaires. The US is not a free market.

chaostheory14• 4 years ago

At least there’s a choice with capitalism. Not to mention that we can consume foreign media if we wish. With socialism there’s only one choice and power is much more concentrated. Like capitalism, socialism isn’t immune to corruption. The difference is the much greater concentration of power in one place for socialism which exacerbates the problem of corruption.

I don’t deny that we’re either experiencing or about to experience late stage capitalism, but socialism tends to hit the late stage much faster as we’ve seen in the 20th century.

verisimi2• 4 years ago

The free market vision you are deriding is failing because of government licensing and law making. Only certain outlets are licensed to print news. And laws are written to prevent what are perceived to be slanderous rumours. This is to say, information is not actually free. And free movement of information is essential for a free market.

I also think that implicit in what you state, is a request for greater governance to manage the free market.

If you ask me, what you really want is less government oversight.

You may respond to say that we will be run by robber barons, if we have even less oversight, or free information.

To which I would respond that we are already run by (the worst) robber barons who currently maintain their control via their control of the governance apparatus, and the illusion many hold that we have anything like a free market. It's just that we are suffering under our illusion so much, that we don't even recognise the problem!

If you ask me, we actually live under a form of disguised fascism, where governments and corporations work together and pretend we have democracy and a free market. They use their mouth pieces (media, education) to misinform us.

concordDance• 4 years ago

A substack supporter then?

ropable• 4 years ago

It's almost as though large, powerful organisations will fight to protect their own positions within a market segment, whether they are private or government entities.

WalterBright3• 4 years ago

The government also tries to influence news sites.

ejb999• 4 years ago

thats an understatement....

rhacker• 4 years ago

_ money flows to news sites that attack their critics.

Fill in the blank, tautology.

germinalphrase• 4 years ago

For those interested, the Energy and Policy Institute follows these kinds of moves, and their newsletter is informative.

https://www.energyandpolicy.org/

brodouevencode2• 4 years ago

Here's another way of framing this headline: "A company that provides critical services has lobbyists - just like pharma, hospital networks, national defense, and food and agriculture."

coding123• 4 years ago

Shorter even: Lobbyists Exist.

mitchellst• 4 years ago

I think there's a bit more to it than that.

It appears that a significant chunk of the local online news market in these regions is only financially viable based on pay-for-coverage arrangements with moneyed interests.

So, I agree, lobbyists gonna lobby. And some of the lines in the article are pearl clutching. (GASP a utility company donated to a SuperPAC that opposed a ballot initiative? Yeah, that's normal. You might not like Citizens United, but that's just something they did, not something they're "accused" of.)

But to the extent that you have a crop of local-interest news and politics websites that present as objective but, based on the quotes in the articles, wouldn't be able to exist without opaque financial arrangements that slant coverage... yeah, it's a genuine media story. Less about the power company, and more about journalism. (Which, indeed, Folkenflik is NPR's media reporter.)

Alabama has high electric rates, an unusually profitable utility company, and this arrangement has proven durable. For me, that's a good enough "so what" for a New York based media reporter to condescend to the journalistic ethics of these Southern publications. It's not just academic; it's harming people.

tenpies• 4 years ago

Also: a news agency receiving funding from a US administration that hates some industries, is here to tell you just how bad those industries are.

May as well be in Canada.

pessimizer• 4 years ago

Instead of volunteering PR and adding distractions, it might be better to say that power companies have "lobbyists" that bribe news sites in return for slandering critics of those companies.

Even though it's strange to call people who bribe news outlets rather than politicians "lobbyists," because that sort of begs the question.

jfengel• 4 years ago

Everybody has lobbyists, but there are legal limits on lobbying. Lobbyists have to register and make some of their activities transparent. They're not allowed to be used for laundering money in political donations, which are sharply limited. Giving money to a newspaper to support a candidate may cross that line. It would take an FEC (or state equivalent) investigation to make a judgment (and probably the courts would want a say in it, too).

Newspapers also have ethical limits. Ethical limits aren't legally enforceable, but for the most part major newspapers don't allow pharma, hospitals, defense, etc. to cross those lines. There are always exceptions, I'm sure, but the newspapers still cling to the hope that they'll be seen as accurate rather than simply shilling for whoever pays them. It undercuts their entire mission.

So this isn't the same as the usual round of lobbying. Lobbying is a legal and regulated activity, a way for groups to coordinate access to politicians and plan their public relations. That always has the risk of being shady, but it's more above-board than most people imagine.

Except when the rules are broken, and in that case it might be a crime. That's newsworthy.

fleddr• 4 years ago

Oh, I guess it's fine then. They all do it.

Your framing is way worse. It shows nihilism and fits downright criminal/corrupt behavior under the much more neutral term "lobbying".

brodouevencode2• 4 years ago

The statement was more of a comment on the acceptance of lobbying (by those accepting the lobby) for critical components of society.

nitwit005• 4 years ago

Publishing lies to destroy people's reputations, and concealing that you were behind the lies isn't "lobbying".

adolph• 4 years ago

NPR is going a great job with this. Another interesting report they have is at National Public Media (which receives corp sponsors for NPR, PBS, etc):

How do brands establish trust? A ground-breaking new study from NPR and Neuro-Insight explores how a platform can transfer its trustworthiness to sponsors, what the subconscious can tell us about purchase intent and the effectiveness of NPR radio sponsorship vs. commercial TV news.

https://www.nationalpublicmedia.com/insights/

WalterBright3• 4 years ago

Every outfit tries to influence news sites.

throwawayacc32• 4 years ago

They also launder their corruption through "woke washing". A great example being a study by PG&E's utility-backed front that made the claim that increasing rates of solar panel installations on houses will raise costs that get shouldered by poor BIPOCs [0]. That means the state should pass net metering changes that greatly favor PG&E, and if you're against them, you're a racist. They got what they wanted.

[0] https://calssa.org/blog/2021/6/5/debunking-the-cost-shift-de...

korroziya• 4 years ago

Your link is from a trade association made up of Solar power interests. How is that any less biased?

joshspankit• 4 years ago

You can’t look at bias vs non-bias (it would be nice, but capitalism makes it almost impossible to be unbiased).

Instead you have to look at the power disparity between sides, and whether you trust the values of each group.

fleventynine3• 4 years ago

Regardless of the racism argument, it seems obvious to me that NEM 2.0 is forcing those who can't afford a solar system to purchase overpriced power from those who can.

I wish we'd just charge/pay people the instantaneous market rate of power. And at noon on a sunny summer day in California, the market rate should be pretty close to zero. Nowadays, the grid needs more storage and peaking generation than it does more solar panels, so we should stop artificially incentivizing rooftop solar panels.

10u152• 4 years ago

Fun fact, you can do this in Australia and see/pay the instantaneous cost of energy. At noon it often goes negative. So you can get paid to consume!

Edit - link to the dashboard

https://aemo.com.au/energy-systems/electricity/national-elec...

m463• 4 years ago

I remember asking a friend - how should solar panels face the sun to get the maximum efficiency?

(I was thinking there must be a way to get the maximum number of kwh out of a day)

He said "You don't orient the panels for the sun, you orient them for PG&E!"

in other words, dump kwh and face them where the sun is at 3 pm onwards

(guess they used regulatory-capture to soak everyone again so even that doesn't matter)

idunno246• 4 years ago

Wasn’t one of the companies in Texas doing that, which is how people ended up with bills in the thousands?

https://theconversation.com/amp/whats-behind-15-000-electric...

photochemsyn• 4 years ago

"It seems obvious to me that investor-owned utilities were forcing those who can't afford to own and operate a natural-gas power plant to purchase overpriced power from those who can..."

Are you sure it's just that as more solar comes online, less natural gas gets burned and so profits for the investor-owned utility drop, while the price for electricity remains the same?

throwawayacc32• 4 years ago

My power goes directly into my neighbor's meter. The power company charges my neighbor the full rate for my power. They pay me almost nothing. Pure fucking profit.

GoToRO• 4 years ago

Off topic: There was an ad that tried to make fun of green energy by having the Eiffel Tower converted to a wind turbine. The ad stated that even that will not be enough. I believe the company was Shell. Does anyone have a link to that ad?

mixdup• 4 years ago

Somehow I knew this was going to be Alabama Power before I clicked the link

This is just scratching the surface. To any normal person this sounds like a massive scandal on its own but this is just what they've allowed to get out. The corruption in state and local government in the states served by Southern Company's electric utilities would make Putin blush

For example, Alabama Power's former CEO is on the board of directors of Regions Financial Corporation, based in Alabama, and a top 25 bank in the US

shadowofneptune• 4 years ago

Certainly gives another meaning to 'the power company.'

Power company money flows to news sites that attack their critics

Related Stories