ExxonMobil accuses California of violating its free speech

I don't get why ExxonMobil is all bent out of shape about this 🤔. I mean, isn't transparency a good thing? Shouldn't they be proud to show how much CO2 they're spewing and how it's affecting the planet? It seems like they're just trying to weasel their way out of taking responsibility for their impact on climate change 💸.

And what's with the "embarrass" claim? Are they implying that California's laws are somehow humiliating them? Newsflash, ExxonMobil: if you're really concerned about your reputation, then maybe you should be more transparent about your operations and not try to hide behind lawsuits 🚫.
 
I mean come on 🙄... ExxonMobil's always playing the victim, right? Like they're the only ones who know best about climate change risks and stuff. Newsflash: just because you're a massive corporation doesn't mean you get to decide what transparency looks like.

These state laws are actually a step in the right direction – companies should be held accountable for their emissions, not trying to weasel out of it with some fancy "double counting" excuse 🙄. And yeah, maybe the regulations aren't perfect, but who's asking them to reveal the exact future trajectory of climate change? That sounds like some wild speculative stuff.

The whole thing just feels like ExxonMobil trying to strong-arm the state into letting them keep their dirty secrets buried 🤐. Meanwhile, regular people are out there dealing with the real consequences of climate change – heatwaves, droughts, the works. Can't we get a break from these corporate shenanigans for once?
 
I feel like ExxonMobil is trying to weasel its way out of being transparent about its climate change impact 🤔. These new laws are basically trying to hold big companies accountable for their actions and it's not that hard to figure out how much carbon they're spewing into the atmosphere, right? I mean, come on, it's like they're saying "hey, don't make us be honest about our emissions" – sounds suspicious to me 🤷‍♂️. And what's up with this "double counting of indirect emissions" thing? It just seems like a fancy way of saying we won't admit to the damage we're causing 😅. The SEC trying to propose similar rules at the federal level is a good start, but it's gonna be tough if big oil companies like ExxonMobil are always trying to water down the message 📊.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top