I feel like instead of naming the storm after ExxonMobil, it would play better if the storm was brought to you by ExxonMobil
this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)
UK Nature and Environment
682 readers
1 users here now
General Instance Rules:
- No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia or xenophobia.
- No incitement of violence or promotion of violent ideologies.
- No harassment, dogpiling or doxxing of other users.
- Do not share intentionally false or misleading information.
- Do not spam or abuse network features.
Community Specific Rules:
- Keep posts UK-specific. There are other places on Lemmy to post articles which relate to global environmental issues (e.g. slrpnk.net).
- Keep comments in English so that they can be appropriately moderated.
Note: Our temporary logo is from The Wildlife Trusts. We are not officially associated with them.
Our spring banner is a shot of Walberswick marshes, Suffolk by GreyShuck.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yeah somehow they would spin this as advertising and find a way to benefit from it. So maybe naming them after execs is better. But like with Boaty McBoatface, why bother asking the public what they think if you’re just going to do what you want anyway?
"BP fucked my house/coast/environment", it's not not true..
*and your wife
They're hoping to spark a craze similar to the ship so they can just ignore the most popular vote?
I don't think you understand how widely familiar people are with [noun]y Mc[noun]face as a name. The name of a storm has literally no effect whatsoever on the atmosphere and climate, so it doesn't matter what the Met Office ends up deciding to call them, what matters is the awareness raised by the campaign, which can actually be turned into action.
I think the point is to try to get people talking about it in the way people did about the Boaty McBoatface thing.
Better yet fossil fuel company ceos and major shareholders
Naming them after the execs would be better.
I think corporations are better. Nobody connects execs with corporations and if someone does and it starts costing them money it's a minor imconvenience they can deal with.
But if you target their company name you target their brand and that's going to be more than a slight inconvenience. Rebranding is crazy expensive and there's no rubbing off that stink without rebranding.
I imagine we're going to get more storms than we have oil companies so eventually we can go after the execs as well.