Eric Schmidt says Google will cut ties with ALEC because group is lying about climate change
Google will stop supporting climate change science deniers, calls them liars — Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt. — JD Lasica — Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt today said it was a …
Context & Ripple Effects
Schmidt's public posture toward the press has historically been guarded — his 2008 performance was catalogued as practicing the art of stonewalling — which is what makes a blunt on-record accusation that ALEC is 'lying about climate change' stand out. This is an executive personally attaching Google's brand to a break with a politically influential trade group.
The story did not stay in the tech press: same-day pickups ran across Bloomberg, The Washington Post, The Guardian, MSNBC, National Journal, ThinkProgress, PandoDaily and The Diane Rehm Show, meaning the announcement landed as a political story about corporate money in climate politics as much as a Silicon Valley one.
First-order effects
- Google ends its financial support for ALEC, removing one of the group's most prominent technology-industry backers at a moment when ALEC's climate positions are under public scrutiny.
- ALEC now carries a public 'climate denier' label applied by name from a marquee member, raising the cost for any company weighing whether to keep funding it.
Second-order effects
- Other technology companies with ALEC ties face a forced choice — follow Google out or defend their continued membership publicly, turning a quiet dues line item into a press question.
- Trade groups generally lose pricing power over corporate members whose executives are willing to defect loudly, because the reputational downside of staying now exceeds the policy access benefit.
Third-order effects
- If executive-level public defections become the template, corporate political spending shifts from low-visibility membership dues to decisions that must survive brand scrutiny — pushing trade groups to moderate positions that alienate their largest funders.
- The pattern points toward climate positioning hardening into a standard due-diligence question for any corporation joining an industry association.
The trend: Corporate America's trade-group memberships are being tested against public climate commitments, with executives increasingly willing to break ranks on record rather than exit quietly.