Big Oil tries to greenwash the world’s dirtiest industry: UN expert wants to criminalize misinformation
Every February, millions of Canadians get together for the Super Bowl, not just for touchdowns and halftime shows, but for the advertisements. Big, creative, and often unforgettable.
In 2023, one such ad came from the Pathways Alliance, a coalition of six of Canada’s largest oilsands producers responsible for 95 percent of the country’s oil sands output, declaring that the oil industry was “in motion” toward net-zero emissions. The message didn’t stop with the TV screen. It rolled past commuters on buses, flashed from transit shelters and scrolled endlessly across social media.
But behind the polished slogans and expensive branding, something smelled off.
In March 2023, Greenpeace Canada filed a formal complaint with Canada’s Competition Bureau. The federal law enforcement agency is responsible for protecting consumers from companies making false and misleading statements to promote their business interests. Greenpeace Canada argued the ads were misleading since their claims failed to mention a critical detail: the companies have no plans to phase out oil production. Their "net-zero" target only applies to emissions generated while extracting the oil, not the far greater emissions released when that oil is burned as fuel.
Formed in 2021, the Pathways Alliance, made up of Suncor, Cenovus, Imperial Oil, Canadian Natural Resources, ConocoPhillips Canada, and MEG Energy, has been lobbying for significant public funding to help cover the costs of a carbon capture project, despite being among Canada’s most profitable companies.
The “net-zero” promise from Pathways Alliance is heavily reliant on expensive and largely unproven carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies.
Critics argue that CCS is a false solution, an expensive, unreliable technology with a history of underperformance. Instead of pouring billions into CCS, they point to proven, more affordable alternatives: renewable energy sources like wind, solar, and hydro, especially when paired with battery storage.
“Incumbent industries like fossil fuel will also promote the clean technology that is least likely to get built or will take the longest time to get built,” MaRS senior director of climate Tyler Hamilton told The Pointer, pointing to the oil and gas industry hitching their “wagon to technologies that are a little bit more far off and are a little bit more risky and unlikely to be built within the foreseeable future.”
He compares carbon removal and carbon capture to smoking.
“It's like smoking a cigarette, and when you blow the smoke out of your mouth, it somehow gets recycled back into the cigarette. It just doesn't address the core issue. You're still smoking a cigarette at the end of the day.”
Even if CCS technologies succeed, environmental groups say, the oilsands remain among the world’s most carbon-intensive sources of crude, three to four times more polluting than conventional oil.
The federal Competition Bureau opened an investigation on Pathways Alliance in April 2023. That fall, Greenpeace submitted an addendum after noticing the alliance had quietly narrowed the scope of its climate claims on its website. But Greenpeace maintained that “the damage has been done” in terms of misleading the public and called on the Bureau to continue its probe.
A Pathways Alliance advertisement appears on a Vancouver bus and a Toronto Transit Commission streetcar (bottom) in 2023 as part of a nationwide campaign promoting their commitment to a net-zero plan that is now "in motion".
(Canadian Public Transit Discussion Board Wiki)
“These companies are putting ads in the Super Bowl claiming to be climate leaders while lobbying against climate action behind closed doors,” co-signatory Joe Vipond, past president of Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) and an emergency room physician in Calgary, Alberta wrote in a statement. “It’s deeply disturbing that in 2023 they are trying to paint themselves as responsible while expanding drilling in the oil sands when the science is clear that net zero means fossil fuel production must wind down now.”
A similar complaint, filed in 2022 by CAPE, targeted the Canadian Gas Association’s $10-million “Fuelling Canada” ad campaign and remains under investigation.
CAPE’S director, health and economic policy, and Fossil Fuel Ads Make Us Sick campaign director Leah Temper told The Pointer that she’s still waiting for an answer on that complaint.
“The way the Bureau conducts its investigations, we’re not allowed access to any information while it's ongoing. We've been waiting now up to three years for the investigation and resolutions for some of these cases,” Temper said.
“So we’re left in the dark, and in the meantime, the ads continue to run.”
The “Voice of Energy” campaign uses photos of young people and videos urging support for natural gas, while downplaying its climate impact. Its website and social media don’t reveal who’s behind it, but Google’s Ads Transparency Center shows nearly a dozen ads funded by the Canadian Gas Association.
Timothy Egan, president and CEO of the Canadian Gas Association, in a YouTube video highlights natural gas as an environmentally friendly energy source because it produces significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions compared to coal and oil when burned for electricity or heating.
(The Canadian Gas Association/YouTube)
In a striking moment at the Competition and Green Growth Summit in September 2022, Commissioner of Competition Matthew Boswell called greenwashing a form of “eco-fraud” and warned that dressing up pollution in a cloak of sustainability isn't just misleading, it may be against the law.
“We see environmental claims everywhere, but they’re not all legit. Greenwashing, the practice of making false or misleading eco-claims about a product or service, is on the rise. It’s our job to protect consumers from eco-fraud,” Boswell said. “Falsely promoting ‘green’ products harms consumers by limiting their ability to make informed decisions. It harms businesses that compete fairly. And it harms the environment.”
In July, UN Special Rapporteur on Climate Change and Human Rights, Elisa Morgera, presented a report to the UN’s 59th General Assembly calling for the criminalization of fossil fuel disinformation, identifying it as a direct threat to basic human rights.
Morgera’s report makes it clear: the burning of fossil fuels is the primary historical and current driver of greenhouse gas emissions, responsible for 81 to 91 percent of total historic human-caused carbon dioxide emissions. In 2023 alone, coal accounted for 41 percent of fossil-related emissions, oil 32 percent, and gas 23 percent.
“There is no scientific doubt that fossil fuels (coal, gas and oil) are the main cause of climate change, and the main driver of other planetary crises – biodiversity loss, toxic pollution, inequalities and mass human rights violations,” the report highlights.
“Several United Nations mechanisms have already identified an international human rights obligation to phase out fossil fuels and related subsidies.”
The author urges wealthy fossil fuel nations, including Canada, to legally phase out oil, gas, and coal entirely by 2030, and compensate communities harmed by these industries.
She demands bans on fracking, fossil fuel exploration, subsidies and false tech solutions that perpetuate pollution. Morgera urges criminalizing fossil fuel disinformation and banning industry lobbying, arguing that simply shifting to clean energy isn’t enough.
Her report highlights how the fossil fuel industry has spent decades blocking climate action and spreading misinformation, violating human rights and worsening the climate crisis.
Fossil fuel companies also often exaggerate their commitment to clean energy by heavily promoting small pilot projects like solar, hydrogen, or renewable natural gas, despite minimal actual investment.
“These projects get outsized attention in shareholder reports and media, creating the illusion of progress while buying time and deflecting criticism,” Hamilton told The Pointer.
At the same time, companies work to make existing products like natural gas appear more eco-friendly by branding them as “clean” in comparison to coal or oil, rather than renewables. Some have even rebranded Canadian oil as “ethical oil,” claiming it’s produced under better human rights standards than oil from other countries.
In February 2024, former NDP MP Charlie Angus introduced a private member’s bill, C-372, An Act Respecting Fossil Fuel Advertising, in the House of Commons to ban fossil fuel advertising in Canada, specifically targeting ads that mislead the public about the environmental and health risks of fossil fuels or promote their supposed environmental or economic benefits.
Angus modelled the legislation on Canada’s tobacco advertising laws, arguing that just as cigarette ads were once banned to protect public health, the same should now apply to fossil fuels.
Much like today’s fossil fuel ads, cigarette companies once used doctors in their marketing; between the 1930s and 1950s, cigarettes were even physician approved, a tactic designed to soothe public fears by exploiting trust in medical authorities.
(Reddit)
“The industry went completely insane, and he ended up subjected to death threats for daring to advance such a thing. The bill itself only ever went through first reading in the House of Commons and then never came back for second reading before the parliament was prorogued and we had the election,” Climate Emergency Unit’s director of strategy Seth Klein told The Pointer.
Industry critics claimed the bill violated free speech, but the act’s wording made clear it targeted corporations, not individuals. It didn’t restrict personal opinions or editorial content; it specifically addressed paid advertising by fossil fuel companies. The only people legally liable under the act would have been senior executives of those companies.
The proposed legislation ultimately did not pass.
Critics argue that the bill’s failure reflects the intense lobbying power of the oil and gas industry. In 2024 alone, fossil fuel companies and industry associations held at least 1,135 lobbying meetings with federal officials.
And the pressure hasn’t let up. In the first three months of 2025, the fossil fuel sector logged 194 additional lobbying meetings with the federal government, including 24 with Prime Minister Mark Carney.
“That’s a lot for a Prime Minister,” Environmental Defence energy transition program manager Emilia Belliveau told The Pointer.
In the first quarter of 2025, the most active fossil fuel lobbyists were Enbridge Inc. and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), each holding 25 meetings with federal officials. Close behind was the Explorers and Producers Association of Canada with 18 meetings, followed by Shell Canada, which held 14.
Tim Hodgson, who became minister of energy and natural resources in May, and took 11 meetings with fossil fuel companies in his first month on the job, including Suncor, Tourmaline, Cenovus, Enmax, Enbridge, Imperial Oil, Pathways Alliance, the Explorers and Producers Association of Canada, and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP). Hodgson was a board member of Calgary-based oil sands company MEG Energy between 2016 and 2019.
Despite mounting international agreements and scientific consensus calling for a fossil fuel phaseout, extraction is still projected to increase. This comes even as renewable energy supplied 30 percent of global electricity in 2023, and evidence shows the world could transition to 100 percent renewable energy within the decade.
Canada’s oil production hit record levels in recent years, and 2024 was no exception. For the fourth year in a row, the country set a new high for crude oil and equivalent production as well as exports, rising 5 percent compared to 2023. The completion of the TransMountain pipeline expansion in May 2024 opened up oil exports to countries beyond the U.S. by nearly 60 percent.
In 2023, the federal government provided more than $18 billion in subsidies to the oil and gas industry, including $8 billion in loan guarantees for the TransMountain pipeline expansion, over $1.3 billion in carbon capture and storage projects, and $7.3 billion in public financing through Crown corporation Export Development Canada.
On January 30, the Government of Canada quietly revealed a new $20 billion loan for the Trans Mountain Expansion (TMX) pipeline, though the deal was dated over a month earlier, on December 13. The massive loan, issued through Export Development Canada’s Canada Account and governed by the federal Cabinet, pushes total public financing for TMX to an estimated $50 billion. Critics say the funding directly contradicts the federal government’s promise to stop subsidizing the project, and comes at a time when many Canadians are facing an affordability crisis. Oil and banking industry CEOs stand to benefit but it's taxpayers who will be left to shoulder the cost. The loan also brings the federal government’s total financial support for the oil and gas sector in 2024 alone to a staggering $28.5 billion.
(EDC, Map: Government of Canada)
In just four years, Ottawa provided at least $65 billion in financial support to major fossil fuel players. “That level of support could have fully funded every major wind and solar project in Canada from 2019-2021 twelve times over,” a 2024 report by Environmental Defence highlighted.
Parliament Hill is once again bending to fossil fuel influence, with Prime Minister Carney seemingly echoing the agenda of oil executives despite his earlier promises of bold climate leadership.
In June, after a closed-door meeting with provincial premiers in Saskatoon, Carney publicly praised the idea of “decarbonized oil” while discussing the potential for new bitumen pipelines.
Alberta premier Danielle Smith eagerly backed the idea, floating what she called a new “grand bargain”: in exchange for federal approval of another bitumen pipeline to tidewater, the ultra-profitable oil companies in the Pathways Alliance would finally move forward with their long-stalled carbon capture and storage project.
“When Prime Minister Carney described Canadian tar sands production as having the potential to be ‘decarbonized oil,’ it was a farce. Tar sands cannot be decarbonized. He knows this, or at least he should. It’s important we call that what it is: blatant climate misinformation from our government,” Belliveau said.
Just as “decarbonized oil” is about as real as vitamin-infused cigarettes, another technology Carney seems to be leaning on is carbon capture, a solution whose effectiveness as a climate strategy remains highly contested by experts.
On July 11, the federal government announced a $16 million investment in energy projects across the Maritime provinces, promising affordable and reliable clean energy for Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick. But buried in the fine print was more funding for carbon capture, a lifeline for the oil and gas industry that’s being dressed up as climate action.
How do we make sense of this shift?
Belliveau says the answer lies in three parts:
First, relentless industry pressure.
“We’ve seen that the oil industry had been strategizing and betting on a Conservative government win. Before the election, they released a letter to all the party leaders asking to be “unleashed”, a pretty telling phrase, invoking an aggressive image, and really revealing about the way they want to operate without restrictions,” she explained.
“Following Carney’s leadership win, they released another letter asking for similar things: rollback of impact assessments, weaker regulations, and cuts to emissions targets. These were all climate policies that the previous government had committed to. Now, with the Carney government, even though it wasn’t the Conservative win they were planning for, they’re using a different tactic. They’re saying: if you want to keep even your modest climate agenda, like industrial carbon pricing, which is already in place, you’ll need to trade off by weakening environmental protections elsewhere.”
Second, we’re seeing echoes of Trump-era economic thinking: the belief that building the Canadian economy means “doubling down on extraction”.
What this reflects is a fundamental “lack of imagination when it comes to economic development.” Rather than diversifying the economy or investing in clean energy and a green transition, government leaders, Belliveau notes, are clinging to a volatile extractive sector that’s already on the decline.
And third, Carney’s own legacy as well as Justin Trudeau’s approach.
“He (Mark Carney) built a climate-friendly reputation as a public banker. But even then, his solutions relied on market-based, voluntary action like the Banking Alliance for Net Zero that came out of Glasgow. So yes, he understands climate change, probably better than most past leaders. But his approach is deeply limited, and not aligned with the scale or urgency of the crisis we face,” she said.
“We saw it throughout the tenure of Justin Trudeau, who tried to straddle both sides; supporting oil development while implementing climate policies. The thinking was that we could appease the fossil fuel industry, bring them to the table, ask them to stop delaying climate action, and hope they’d allow meaningful regulations to move forward. But it's clear now how misguided that approach was. The oil industry is never satisfied. It will keep attacking climate regulations, keep resisting policies that protect our environment, our health, and our future because an unregulated industry remains far more profitable for them.”
On June 25, the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and Environmental Defence released a report warning that Canada’s continued expansion of oil and gas production could leave billions in future investments stranded. With 81 percent of Canadian oil and 44 percent of its natural gas destined for export, the industry is highly exposed to changing global demand, rising competition, and growing climate policy pressure.
Drawing from data by the International Energy Agency and Rystad Energy, the report found that up to 66 percent of capital investments in Canadian oil and gas projects between 2025 and 2040 could become stranded under a 1.5 degrees Celsius climate scenario. Even under current policies and net-zero pledges, 39 percent of investments remain at risk, especially if carbon capture technologies fail to meet expectations.
“The more Canadian supply outpaces global demand, the greater the financial risk to investors, governments, and workers,” IISD policy advisor Steven Haig said. “We need to stop thinking of oil and gas expansion as a safe bet for Canada’s economy because it is quickly becoming the opposite.”
Environmental Defence’s oil and gas program manager Aly Hyder Ali echoed the message: “As the world continues to move away from fossil fuels, the most strategic move is not to expand oil and gas, but to manage its decline while investing in renewable energy.”
A recent Leger national poll commissioned by the David Suzuki Foundation reveals that more than two-thirds of Canadians (67 percent) believe the federal government should prioritize climate action and nature protection, and 65 percent strongly supported investments in renewable energy over fossil fuel development.
But why then do we often fall prey to greenwashing?
A 2024 study describes greenwashing as a kind of "green fetishism," relying not just on corporate messaging, but on a subconscious willingness among the public to believe it.
“We can be simultaneously aware that greenwashing is taking place and accept the imaginaries of sustainability presented to us in a semi-conscious way,” the report’s author Joe Williams notes.
Citing philosopher Slavoj Zizek's idea of “fetishistic disavowal,” the study suggests that many people know on some level that endless consumerism is incompatible with sustainability, yet subconsciously accept the illusion that ethical consumption can solve the climate crisis. This internal contradiction is captured in the phrase: “I know very well, but still…”
MaRS’s Tyler Hamilton notes many people are curious about switching to electric vehicles (EVs), but persistent messaging, often amplified by the fossil fuel and auto industries, feeds fears about cost, reliability, and range anxiety. Social media campaigns subtly reinforce the idea that EVs are risky, while gas cars are safer and cleaner, and industries highlight improvements in gas car efficiency and pollution control, which, while true for some pollutants like sulfur and nitrogen oxides, ignore the core issue of carbon emissions.
The Volkswagen emissions scandal, known as "Dieselgate," involved the company installing software called "defeat devices" in millions of diesel cars to cheat emissions tests. These devices detected when a car was being tested and activated full emissions controls, but during normal driving, the cars emitted up to 40 times more nitrogen oxides (NOx) than allowed by law. The scandal was uncovered in 2015, leading Volkswagen to admit the deception and face multi-billion dollar settlements for violating clean air regulations, including an $18 billion fine in the U.S. and billions more spent on vehicle fixes and penalties worldwide. In a 2017 study, researchers estimated that Volkswagen's excess emissions are predicted to cause 1,200 premature deaths in Europe.
“People are very susceptible to clinging to the status quo, and even if they're interested in taking a leap into new technologies, any seeds of doubt that are planted by incumbent industries are amplified and much more powerful influencers,” he noted.
British Columbia-based climate researcher George Benson notes this happens because “we have a fragmented informational ecosystem, and we have advertising actors that are way more sophisticated than they've ever been.”
“The misinformation that happens is because people don't know the difference between what is something reasonably objective and factual, what's advertising and that is intentional, and it's really dangerous,” he said.
It’s precisely this tension that the oil and gas industry exploits; flooding our lives with green-tinted advertising that we may not actively notice, but still register subconsciously and reinforces false narratives of environmental progress.
The public’s conflicting views on fossil fuels and renewables also widen the window for misinformation. A 2022 survey by Lachapelle & EcoAnalytics found that 63 percent or six in ten Canadians either believe Canada can both expand oil and gas production and achieve net-zero emissions or aren’t sure what to think.
Western University political scientist Laura Stephenson has tracked how public attitudes have shifted. Nearly 90 percent of Canadians still agree climate change is real, a figure that has remained steady, the share who attribute it primarily to human activity has dropped from 57 percent in 2020 to 49 percent in 2025. At the same time, in the last five years, more people now see climate change as a mix of human and natural causes.
2020 saw a 50/50 split but the latest data shows 60 percent Canadians now say policies that create jobs should come ahead of policies that protect the environment.
(Consortium on Electoral Democracy)
Perhaps most striking: Canadians are now more likely to prioritize jobs and the economy over environmental concerns.
Stephenson noted that many people tend to view environmental protection as a trade-off with economic growth, a perception that likely drives the shift in public opinion, even if it's not necessarily accurate.
In recent years, the focus has shifted from outright climate denial to what experts call “solution skepticism” — especially on social media — where memes and messaging cast doubt on the viability of climate solutions like renewable energy. The goal is to make people feel that nothing will work, leaving them overwhelmed and resigned to fate, Climate Emergency Unit’s director of strategy Seth Klein says.
Oil Sands Action, a subsidiary of the pro-oil advocacy group Canada Action, appears to focus specifically on defending and promoting Alberta’s oilsands industry. Both groups were founded by Calgary realtor Cody Battershill, a prominent industry advocate with close ties to the Conservative Party and Canada’s oil and gas sector. Through Canada Action, Battershill has worked to build public support for major fossil fuel projects such as Enbridge’s Northern Gateway Pipeline and TransCanada’s now-cancelled Energy East pipeline, positioning himself as a key voice in the campaign to expand Canada’s oil industry.
Klein believes “it’s absolutely possible” to criminalize fossil fuel misinformation, and “should be done” in Canada.
“But one thing is clear: for whatever reason, this government seems unwilling to truly challenge fossil fuel corporations. They talk about climate change, but often avoid addressing its root cause—fossil fuels. This disconnect is partly due to widespread climate illiteracy, which the media has failed to correct through proper public education,” he noted.
“But it’s also a failure of political leadership. Compare that to leaders like California Governor Gavin Newsom, who not only names fossil fuel companies as a major barrier to progress but is actively suing them for climate-related damages. In contrast, Canadian federal leaders rarely speak that boldly. Instead, they try to craft climate policies that fossil fuel companies can endorse. But if the fossil fuel industry is happy to stand beside you and support your climate plan, chances are, it’s not a serious plan.”
In November 2023, the federal government introduced Bill C-59, aimed at strengthening greenwashing regulations through the Competition Act; the legislation passed without amendments on June 19, 2024, and received Royal Assent on June 20, 2024.
Since its passage, several oil and gas companies including MEG Energy, Suncor, Cenovus, and Canadian Natural have “temporarily” removed references to sustainability and climate from their websites.
“There is uncertainty on how the new law will be interpreted and applied. Until the Competition Bureau provides clarity and specific guidance on what is required to comply with these new laws, given the associated risk of non-compliance, we have temporarily removed some environmental and climate content from our website, social media and other public communications,” a statement released by Suncor reads.
Greenhushing is the practice of companies withholding information about their sustainability initiatives.
(The Sustainable Agency)
Canada Climate Law Initiative notes: “While companies must be careful with their statements to avoid greenwashing risks and the other risks arising therefrom, they should not fear or refuse to publicly disclose climate-related information. This practice is called greenhushing. Instead, companies should engage in real climate actions, avoid boilerplate disclosures, get third-party verification, and be transparent in their communications.”
In 2024, important changes were made to the Competition Act to give more power to the Competition Tribunal—a special decision-making panel that handles competition issues. Now, the tribunal can look at past unfair business deals, impose bigger fines, and let regular people or businesses seek compensation starting in June 2025. It included new rules to stop companies from making false or misleading environmental claims with stronger protections for people who report problems and penalties if companies don’t follow agreements.
Some industry groups have pushed back against these new rules. In September 2024, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) criticized the greenwashing rules saying they would “effectively silence” companies, preventing them from talking to Canadians about their environmental efforts. This criticism, echoed by the Alberta government and even a former commissioner of competition, centres on concerns that the rules are vague, especially the requirement to back up green claims using “internationally recognized methodology.”
This ‘chilling effect’ is a “misreading of the law,” Greenwashing legal expert Iris Fairley-Beam told The Pointer.
“Some large industry players have stirred fear around the new greenwashing rules, making smaller companies worry they’ll get punished for trying to do the right thing. But that’s mostly a misunderstanding of the law. The law is aimed at bad actors who knowingly mislead the public, not those making an honest effort,” Fairley-Beam said.
The Competition Act already includes a ‘due diligence’ defense—if a company makes a claim in good faith and uses a reasonable method to back it up, they’re unlikely to face penalties.
(Government of Canada)
But can criminalizing fossil fuel misinformation potentially infringe on freedom of speech and expression?
Fairley-Beam says “it is possible,” and it’s already being put to the test.
In December 2024, several Alberta-based business groups, including the Alberta Enterprise Group and the Independent Contractors Business Association, launched a legal challenge against the federal government's Bill C-59, arguing that its anti-greenwashing amendments to the Competition Act are unconstitutional, infringe on freedom of expression, and create an unfair regulatory environment.
But Section 1 of the Charter allows certain limits on Charter rights, as long as those limits can be justified in a free and democratic society. “Basically this understanding that we can't all have absolute rights if we're going to live together, right? That’s where hate speech laws come into play—that's a limit on your freedom of expression. But the idea is that it protects other people's freedom of expression too,” she highlighted.
“Much of the panic has been fueled by those who want the law repealed, claiming it threatens free speech; when in fact, it simply requires truth in advertising.”
With its recent amendments, the Competition Act now covers some of the ground a criminal law might, but without imposing criminal penalties. “It prohibits businesses from making environmental claims about a product or business activity unless those claims are properly substantiated. If a company is found to have violated these rules, there are consequences, but they fall under civil, not criminal, law,” Fairley-Beam explained.
She says Canada’s “decently far” from criminalizing greenwashing. For now, she sees consumer protection laws and the Competition Act as more flexible and effective tools.
“If the goal is to protect truth in the marketplace, then consumer protection laws and the Competition Act are the right tools. Criminal law might be more appropriate if the focus shifts to protecting broader public rights, but given the current federal climate, I think we're still a fair distance from going down that path,” she noted.
Email: [email protected]
At a time when vital public information is needed by everyone, The Pointer has taken down our paywall on all stories to ensure every resident of Brampton, Mississauga and Niagara has access to the facts. For those who are able, we encourage you to consider a subscription. This will help us report on important public interest issues the community needs to know about now more than ever. You can register for a 30-day free trial HERE. Thereafter, The Pointer will charge $10 a month and you can cancel any time right on the website. Thank you
Submit a correction about this story
