It seems shakeups in green reporting are all the rage this year. First we heard that NYT is closing its environment desk: New York Times Dismantles Its Environment Desk
Then last Friday late in the day (5:10PM EST) we got an offhanded announcement that NYT is closing its Green Blog.
Now today we learn that WaPo is moving out their long time eco-reporter from the environment beat, reportedly over conflict of interest issues.
From Junkscience.com:
Victory: JunkScience forces Juliet Eilperin out of WaPo environment beat
JunkScience has been after her since 2009, with WaPo ombudsman support. No doubt she will deny… just like she did her conflict of interest, until it became too much even for the Post.
Click for the straw that broke the camel’s back.
Even the outgoing WaPo ombudsman Patrick Pexton, in one of his last acts, agreed with JunkScience.
Skiphil says:
March 4, 2013 at 12:52 pm
“Her husband Andrew Light is big with Podesta’s Center for American Progress (sic). He is supposed to be an expert in ethics (PhD and Professor of Ethics), yet she couldn’t seem to get any proper advice on disclosure and conflict of interest.”
Search the internet and see what passes for ethic at the major universities. I have discovered that they feel proud of the actions of Peter Gleick and even teach courses on civil disobedience. Here are a few examples.
http://blogs.law.widener.edu/climate/
http://rockblogs.psu.edu/rockethics/
Louis Hooffstetter says:
March 4, 2013 at 6:46 pm
“We are all going to hell for having so much fun with this.
Keep up the good work.”
Oh, I see. That’s why there aren’t many posts. I assumed it was Juliet.
I knew I would be able to use this one day.
That’s an “oh no you di-ent!”
Oh, the Humanity!
Not only does the NY Times close its green desk, while WaPo boots Juliet Eilperin out of her activist climate beat, but now the Editorial Board of WaPo has taken a stand in favor of the Keystone XL pipeline. Hacktivists everywhere must be apoplectic (they are not going all skeptic, they strongly endorse a “carbon tax” but they recognize that the fight over Keystone XL is stupid):
“Environmentalists are fighting the wrong battle”
“…Under anti-Keystone activists’ very best scenario — Keystone XL and all other new pipeline capacity restricted — they could hope to reduce Canadian oil-sands production by only 2 to 4 percent by 2030. As long as the world demands oil, energy companies will find it profitable to extract and transport their product in all sorts of ways. If new pipelines are out of the picture, companies will rely more on rail, the use of which they could easily ramp up.”
“The analysis underscores the extent to which activists have trumped up a relatively mundane infrastructure issue into the premier environmental fight of this decade, leading to big marches and acts of civil disobedience to advance a cause that is worthy of neither. The activists ought to pick more important fights. Until they do, the president should ignore their pressure….”
Careful not step on WaPo.
Early moulting is how small furry animals adapt to climate change. It’s worse than we thought–and happening faster than expected.
Both the NYT and the WaPo changes remind me a bit of Hillary and her results in the Middle East. I keep waiting for a video ad cataloging the chaos there, with Hillary proudly saying something like “my work here is done”. Damage done, accept rewards, move on to the next.
Appologies for this…
But in that pic, she is almost the spitting image of the “Mom” character in Ramstein’s “Mein Teil” video. The drummer, in drag, did the actual performance. Lighten the hair up and shes a dead ringer for “her”.
This is stupid. Where is the good news? Obongo and all the democrats announced climate change is the next agenda. It’s safe to say all climate related legislation will be ramped through after the elections so the republicans you support will not get any heat from their constituency for caving in. The fake conservative party will always let you down as they did with the health care bill, immigration, education, etc….
On C-span the liberals and their own promoted ‘professionals’ kept creaming their pants and gloating about clean energy jobs, fighting climate change, saving the earth and other pie on the sky liberal beliefs.
I don’t see the point of this blog and this stupid feel good story post. If the point of this blog was to stop the insanity of climate legislation, well you lost. And the gay, conservative, let’s keep it professional, feel good attitude is the reason.
CO2 omission is an indirect measurement of wealth. By cutting down CO2 omission, the democrat party is really saying through a euphemism, we need to cut off some of your wealth. That is the goal of those initiate these policies whether the talking heads on tv that support this position realize it or not. Wattsupwiththat could have taken this position, instead it kept feeding the ‘rogue scientist’ nonsense story. This is why the conservative faggot approach will never work.
I don’t know what Anthony’s goal is, but all I see is just another conservative blog that fails to conserve anything.
Beesaman: If the BBC were to eject all those with bias, there would be very few people left! It’s endemic.
[snip]
People are fed up by environmental alarmists claiming that the sky is falling all the time that theyI simply are starting to ignore them in increasing numbers. The Washington Post (as well as the New York Times) see this and are acting accordingly.
Eilperin did not major in science nor journalism.
So, how did Eilperin land a position with a major establishment media outlet as an environmental reporter in the first place? Her degree is in politics…oh, wait…never mind.