The Guardian which is determined to play its role in environmental crisis on Wednesday announced that it will no longer accept advertisements from oil and gas companies.
The major organisation in order to reduce the carbon footprint of the company has put the order into immediate effect, becoming the first news organisation to do so.
"Our decision is based on the decades-long efforts by many in that industry to prevent meaningful climate action by governments around the world," the company's acting chief executive, Anna Bateson, and the chief revenue officer, Hamish Nicklin, said in a joint statement.
Around the globe, various environmental groups have long proclaimed that energy firms employ lavish advertising campaigns to "greenwash" their operations. Further adding that, even though the majority of these companies continue to make a profit from fossil fuel extraction, they promote relatively small expenditures in renewable energy through these ads.
The editor-in-chief Katharine Viner, declared last year that the Guardian would update its style guide to reflect the severity of the Earth's environmental crisis, utilising words such as "climate emergency " and " winter heating " rather than " climate change " and " global warming".
They further highlighted that their response to the global heating was the, "most important challenge of our times" since they themselves have reported on these energy company clearly harm the environment.
Advertising accounts for 40 percent of GMG revenue, which means it remains a key way to funding journalism produced by journalists from the Guardian and Observer around the world. Making the decision to reject advertisement money is a bold move.
Bateson and Nicklin said the ban would result in a financial hit. "The funding model for the Guardian is going to remain precarious over the next few years. It is true that rejecting some adverts might make our lives a tiny bit tougher in the very short term. Nonetheless, we believe building a more purposeful organisation and remaining financially sustainable have to go hand in hand."
They acknowledged that some readers would like the company to turn down advertising for any product with a significant carbon footprint, such as cars or holidays, but said this was not financially sustainable while the media industry's business model remained in crisis.
"Stopping those ads would be a severe financial blow, and might force us to make significant cuts to Guardian and Observer journalism around the world," they said.
They hoped readers would continue to sign up as members to support the Guardian's journalism but that advertising would remain a key source of funding for years to come. As a result, the pair said they hoped the decision to ban fossil fuel adverts would appeal to other companies who would like to advertise with the Guardian.
"We believe many brands will agree with our stance, and might be persuaded to choose to work with us more as a result. The future of advertising lies in building trust with consumers, and demonstrating a real commitment to values and purpose."
The campaign group Greenpeace welcomed the move. "This is a watershed moment, and the Guardian must be applauded for this bold move to end the legitimacy of fossil fuels," said Mel Evans, senior climate campaigner for Greenpeace UK.
"Oil and gas firms now find themselves alongside tobacco companies as businesses that threaten the health and wellbeing of everyone on this planet.
"Other media outlets, arts and sports organisations must now follow suit and end fossil fuel company advertising and sponsorship."