A documentary, Merchants of Doubt, was filmed in 2014 based on the ideas conveyed by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway in their book of the same name. With the help of many invited climate scientists and other experts, as well as their opponents, the movie tells how large corporations and influential political and business actors manipulate research data and facts to instill doubt regarding the existence of global warming. When discussing this matter, the narrators refer viewers to the fact that many American tobacco companies in the past utilized the same methods to make the public more accepting of smoking by stating that there was no clear evidence verifying that tobacco causes multiple diseases and death. The film also makes it clear that the same figures who were involved in the encouragement of cigarette use before are now engaged in the debunking of the “global warming myth.” When doing so, those who believe that climate change is not real primarily pursue their financial or political interests. It will be argued in the present paper that such activities inspired by self-interest contradict the notions of justice and fairness.
Nowadays, a plethora of models of justice exist, and the theory developed by John Rawls is one of the most famous. While Rawls suggests that different individuals cannot be equal in their capacities and positions, the very concept of justice still implies that all goods and resources must be distributed fairly or, in other words, equally across all members of the community. It means that society can maximize justice merely by striving to create the maximum good for everyone. Thus, in case one person undertakes efforts to gain personal benefits at the expense of others, he or she behaves unjustly and immorally.
When applying some of Rawls’ concepts of justice to the situation described in Merchants of Doubt, it becomes clear that the actions of tobacco companies and such public figures and scientists as Frederick Singer who claim that climate change is a hoax reduce fairness in the distribution of social values. When trying to persuade the global community that there is no global warming, that it is not caused by human actions, or even that it may be beneficial for people, most of them aim to prevent the spread of the green movement that they consider socialist and communist. Besides, many of those speakers against climate change receive high fees from large corporations whose survival is under a threat due to an increasing environmental protection sentiment.
It seems that the opponents of the global warming idea as part of a socialist political agenda believe that the spread of the environmental ideology is harmful to capitalist values. However, it is questionable whether capitalism maximizes the equal distribution of goods. At the same time, scientists report that climate change poses a significant threat to individuals’ abilities to exercise the most basic rights, including health and safety. Thus, the activities of Singer, as well as his sponsors and counterparts contribute to social injustice. The more actions on the prevention of global warming are delayed, the more people, especially those who live in developing countries, are expected to lose opportunities to exercise their liberties and have chances for a decent life.
Merchants of Doubt is interesting because it tries to find an answer to a highly debated issue and explore why people are reluctant to change their behaviors that put their very existence under threat. The ideas conveyed in the film seem to be very persuasive because they are based on strong evidence and facts obtained through an in-depth investigation. The film demonstrates that information plays a substantial role in the lives of individuals and societies as a whole and that the way it is treated and presented shapes both human decisions and behaviors. Unfortunately, many powerful figures and organizations often abuse information to attain personal goals. However, movies like Merchants of Doubt teach viewers to be more cautious and critical of the information they receive and not to take it on trust.