News analysis displays gross lack of concern about Gulf spill
An editorial in the New Orleans Times-Picayune had it right: “Coastal residents need President Obama to keep the pressure on BP and to use every resource at his disposal to fight this catastrophe.”
It is time for this country’s “paper of record” to do its part to keep pressure on the White House and industry alike.
‘See you on the other side’ - Meet Jessica Lum, a terminally ill 25-year-old who chose to spend what little time she had practicing journalism
#Realtalk: This is the best moment to be in journalism - The old stuff isn’t coming back, but that’s okay
Streams of consciousness - Millennials expect a steady diet of quick-hit, social-media-mediated bits and bytes. What does that mean for journalism?
Sticking with the truth - How ‘balanced’ coverage helped sustain the bogus claim that childhood vaccines can cause autism
An ink-stained stretch - Can Aaron Kushner save the Orange County Register—and the newspaper industry?
Fearless British mother who talked down Woolwich terrorists
“It is only you versus many people, you are going to lose”
7 questions for President Obama
Stop with the Jew-ranking already!
“There are some lists that have helped Jews in the past, including, most notably, Schindler’s, but…”
Please continue pronouncing ‘gif’ any way you please
We are all correct
CJR's Guide to Online News Startups
Uptown Messenger – Hyperlocal news for a neighborhood in New Orleans
Who Owns What
The Business of Digital Journalism
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.
Oh very illuminating. Not.
You point out that the NYT commit the heresy of having an article that has a tenor that is "way off" according to your reporter who has done nothing more than read what everyone else has written.
Good for the NYT to report “the Deepwater Horizon blowout is not unprecedented, nor is it yet among the worst oil accidents in history". Of course its relevant and matters, what a ridiculous suggestion that it isn;t. When everyone else is saying it could be the worst environmental disaster in history, there is nothing more important than reporting context.
Your article claims a "gross lack of concern" by the NYT, which is just BS. You simply expect a different line from the NYT and expect it to be pursued in defiance of logic or truth.
I'll just cap my comments off with the most ridiculous statement of all in this so-called piece of analysis:
"All the more reason why industry, government, and, yes, journalists, should be operating under the assumption that a worst-case scenario is unfolding. Doing otherwise will help nobody."
I'd like to invite journalists to follow this advice from CJR and operate under the assumption that the worst-case scenario is operating in everything at present. Nuclear terrorism, emerging infectious diseases, climate change. It is all a disaster. Please journalists yell at the top of your voices. This will definitely help society judge the level of risk and prioritise. Lets just run around like headless chickens screaming at the top our voices...The End is Nigh! The End is Night!
Regards, a reporter reporting on the oil slick
#1 Posted by Catherine Poles, CJR on Tue 4 May 2010 at 07:32 PM
To Be Clear
The New York Times' coverage of the oil industry in general, the relationship between oil and climate change, and the whole ExxonMobil thing, and etc., has been dismal. Period. Aside from the recent spill and BP, The New York Times doesn't lift even a little finger to provide the public with straightforward info and investigative journalism regarding ExxonMobil, who happens to be one of their largest advertisers by far.
I have a background that should provide some credibility to this observation: I was a chemical engineer from Berkeley. I worked in the oil industry for Chevron Research for several years. I've had offers from Exxon and Shell, in addition to Chevron. I've been a consultant with McKinsey. I can read, and I've been reading The New York Times for the last several years -- daily for much of that time, until the last several months, when I gave up on them.
The Times has (and is) dropping the ball, and it's a big one. Anyone who wants to do an analysis of the paper can easily see that.
By the way, the Times' Bill Keller is the son of the late George Keller, who was the Chairman of Chevron when I worked there and throughout most of the 1980s. Bill Keller is just as much from "an oil family" as many of the politicians who are criticized (usually rightly) on that count.
The Times is dropping the ball. I've been saying it here for a couple years now. Nothing has changed. Give me a call if you like.
Cheers,
Jeff
#2 Posted by Jeff Huggins, CJR on Wed 5 May 2010 at 01:46 AM
"Oh very illuminating. Not."
I remember, back when I was in high school, when people thought that was funny.
Do you roll down your windows at intersections and ask the passengers in the adjoining car for some grey poupon? Because that would be totally funny 20 years ago too.
By the by, have you got any reason why we should be treating as trivial an open oil sore at the bottom of the ocean which, based on the precedents of these things, will take two to four months to close?
Quit being such a Heather (Ooo. Another eighties reference. I'm hip too) and do your job.
Like for instance, what are the parallels between the West Atlas Timor Sea oil rig oil disaster, which took place in late August and lasted until November, dumping between 400 to 2000 barrels of oil into the Timor sea, and Deepwater?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montara_oil_spill
Barely anyone covered the Timor disaster and no one I've seen has analyzed the two incidences which were not a year apart.
You combine this with the "500 fires on platforms in the gulf since 2006,"
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/23/us/23offshore.html
recorded by the legendarily corrupt, Bush Minerals Management Service (Interior Department Sex Scandals ring a bell?) and we may be looking at a collapse of global industry standards.
But no Cathy. Looking at all that is work. Let's just be snarky instead while you adjust your makeup for the camera.
And thanks for being part of the problem.
#3 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Wed 5 May 2010 at 02:03 PM
Thanks for letting us know about the conflict of interest. How can we prevent this from ever happening again? There is nobody who seems willing to draw the line and say, "no". It seems as if Cheney and Bush are still there, environment wise.
I have a friend in New Orleans who wrote a few days ago that the hydrogen sulfide smell there was very noticeable.
People have been stocking up on seafood, Ive read.
If the area is fouled by a major spill, thats going to cost a huge number of jobs along the Coast. Lots of people work in fishing and tourism.
Who is going to compensate them? This kind of thing needs to be made SO expensive that companies will become much more careful.
Money is the only language they understand.
#4 Posted by brent, CJR on Mon 10 May 2010 at 11:59 PM
The entire debacle is being under reported and the under response is sickening. Where is the outcry from Obama? Where is the outcry demanding that Obama fight the spill and BEGIN CLEANUP NOW. Why wait to begin cleanup? Is this whole downplay of one of the worst environmental crimes of our generation because liberal newspapers are going easy on a liberal president?!
#5 Posted by princetonz, CJR on Wed 12 May 2010 at 04:14 PM