New York Times: Let’s Pretend Renewable Energy Doesn’t Even Exist
I just learned something quite valuable. To my astonishment, it’s possible for credible journalists to discuss the dangers of nuclear power and the relative safety of natural gas, going on at length about the world energy situation, without once mentioning solar, wind, and biomass. Until I read the above-linked article in the New York Times, I would have said that simply couldn’t happen in the year 2011.
Of course, one question is how safe natural gas actually is, given that its extraction relies on hydraulic fracturing of the bedrock in the Earth’s crust. As journalist Marie Baca notes in her response to the Times article: “What about the concerns that hydraulic fracturing can mobilize radioactive material in bedrock? Or the documented cases of methane migration? Or the San Bruno disaster, anyone? Any of these worth mentioning, maybe?”
But again, the most shocking thing about the piece is its blatent ignoring of the alternatives that truly are safe. Most of the rest of the world is moving quickly toward clean energy. Not only are we refusing to play a leadership (or even an effective followership) role here, some of us, apparently, would like to pretend it doesn’t exist.
The culprit here is the tightly consolidated mass media and the ever narrowing ownership thereof. The myth of the “liberal” media is a zombie – quite dead to the dispassionate observer, but still stumbling around and causing trouble.
When it comes to what passes in some circles for “journalism”, the bias of any given major media outlet is predictable, favoring above all else the preferences of it’s major advertizing clients and of the entities that own it. Operational exceptions are very few and often lean instead toward specific audience demographics. “Truth” is measured by the weight of gold, and in very short-term scales.
When describing anything in the mass media apart from mutual exclusivity, the words “investigative journalism” are already passing into the realm of the archaic. “Fair and Balanced” now bears the same level of intellectual credibility as “Pre-approved” or “Defense Spending”. The internet – such as it is – dangles on a fraying thread as the last real hope for an informed citizenry and a wise, ethical and effective popular movement.
That’s exactly where I believe that you’re both well-suited and well-placed to continue to be a force for positive change, Craig – and that’s among the reasons why I’m very pleased and proud to count you as a friend.
As the old saying goes, what we do, we must do well, and quickly.
Time is short.
Thanks very much for the insights and kind words, Cameron.