By David Hogberg on 4.22.05 @ 12:07AM
What better occasion to honor the shameless press coverage of environmental wackies and wackos.
April 22 -- the 35th Annual Earth Day -- brings important
news from the Corporate Social Responsibility Newswire
Service. A forum called "Getting to the Heart of Conscious
Commerce," to be held April 25-27 in Los Angeles, will feature a
keynote panel on "FORCES OF NATURE -- The Future of
Sustainability." Chair of the panel: noted environmental activist
Daryl Hannah, star of Kill Bill, Splash, and
Attack of the 50 Foot Woman.
Hannah, the press release informs us, "uses solar power, adopts
animals, drives a clean burning vehicle that runs on biodiesel, and
lives a sustainable lifestyle." Nowhere does it tell us that only
the mega-rich, like movie stars, can afford such a lifestyle. But
we do learn that the panel speakers include noted economist,
pro-skateboarder and X-Games gold medalist Danny Way, who is also a
board member of the Action Sports Environmental Coalition. Also
participating: Anthony Kiedis, the highly respected climatologist
and lead singer for the rock band Red Hot Chili Peppers. (No word
on whether his side-kick Flea will put in an appearance.)
After reading the news release, I couldn't help but think of the
recent missive "The Death of Environmentalism," by Michael
Schellenberger and Ted Nordhaus. Long-time environmentalists,
Schellenberger and Nordhaus complain that the environmental
movement's "institutions are outmoded. Today environmentalism is
just another special interest." Schellenberger and Nordhaus may
overstate the case that environmentalism is dead, but the upcoming
event in Los Angeles suggests it is gravely ill.
One thing keeping it on life support is a compliant media. Most
environmental groups, no matter how radical, get kid-gloves
treatment from the press. When I reviewed news stories about the
Ruckus Society for an article I wrote recently, I noticed that none
mentioned its radical politics, and only one, in the Seattle
Times, mentioned its involvement with the 1999
protests-cum-riots in Seattle. U.S. News and World Report
recently noted that the Ruckus Society will hold training camps
this summer to teach activists the art of disrupting U.S. Army
recruiters. Given the way the press views the military, don't be
too surprised if this new tactic wins Ruckus Society the moniker
"mainstream."
It appears the media prefer to reserve the term "radical" for
violent groups like the Earth Liberation Front (ELF). This week
William Jensen Cottrell, a graduate student in physics at CalTech
and self-proclaimed member of ELF, was convicted for his role in acts of arson and vandalism
in August 2003 that destroyed 125 SUVs at various dealerships. The
Associated Press story dubbed ELF "radical." The Los Angeles
Times called ELF "militant." That was when the press
bothered to mention Cottrell's association with ELF. No mention of
ELF in the Reuters account or in this blurb from the San Jose Mercury News.
Perhaps it is too impolitic to mention violence by environmental
extremists just before Earth Day.
Of course, what can you expect from the San Jose Mercury
News? The tone for its coverage of environmental issues was
set by its now-departed editor David Yarnold, who became executive vice
president of Environmental Defense. Yarnold claimed he was joining
"one of the nation's most accomplished and respected environmental
advocacy non-profits." That it is also a very liberal organization,
has vehemently opposed many of the Bush Administration's
environmental policies, and has extensive ties to Teresa
Heinz-Kerry apparently mattered not a whit. Indeed, one can infer
from the lack of media coverage over Yarnold's career change that
the mainstream media considers an editor of a large daily newspaper
going to work for a liberal advocacy organization no different from
a second baseman being traded from the Giants to the Yankees.
Finally, while the Associated Press may have gotten the ELF
connection right, its bias was on full display in a story about an Energy Information Administration
(EIA) study purporting to show that mandatory limits on greenhouse
gases "would not significantly affect average economic growth rates
across the country through 2025." The article can't help but note
that the EIA study "runs counter to President Bush's repeated
pronouncements that limits on carbon dioxide and other gases that
warm the atmosphere like a greenhouse would seriously harm the U.S.
economy." But while observing that Bush rejected the Kyoto treaty,
it ignores the Senate's 95-0 vote against Kyoto because the
agreement's provisions let developing countries off the hook. And
what about the critics of the EIA study? Well, the AP story doesn't
mention any. You'll have to read Joel Schwarz's piece in Tech Central Station for that.
"Environmentalism" may now be little more than yet another than
a special interest, but environmental groups have little to fear.
Sympathetic press coverage can prop up a movement long after its
moment has passed. And few causes currently receive better media
treatment than environmentalism.
topics:
Trade, Mainstream Media, Business, Sports, Environment, Military, Energy