LAT, Sac Bee fracking coverage: Same old glaring omission

LAT, Sac Bee fracking coverage: Same old glaring omission

Here we go again. On Friday, the state government released its draft fracking regulations.

And while in their coverage, the Sacramento Bee and the Los Angeles Times cited environmentalists’ dire warnings about fracking, the papers once again made a gigantic omission: They don’t note the Obama administration says it’s safe.

obama.politico.frackingThat’s right — the greenest president ever says it’s safe. On the 2012 campaign trail, Barack Obama liked to boast that fracking had made the U.S. “the Saudi Arabia of natural gas.” That’s why greens are unhappy with him, as the recent Politico headline shows.

Why isn’t this relevant in California?

For a classic example of horrible CA fracking coverage, check out this quote from Sally Jewell, Obama’s secretary of the interior:

“I know there are those who say fracking is dangerous and should be curtailed, full stop. That ignores the reality that it has been done for decades and has the potential for developing significant domestic resources and strengthening our economy and will be done for decades to come.”

NYT quotes Obama aide on fracking safety; LAT quotes flack

That’s what she said at a May 17 news conference on federal fracking rules. The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times both covered the conference. Guess which paper cited Jewell as testifying to fracking’s safety, and guess which paper cited an oil-industry group.

Bingo. The New York Times matter of factly noted that Jewell, and thus the Obama administration, see fracking as safe. But not the L.A. Times.

“‘States have been successfully regulating fracking for decades, including on federal lands, with no incident of contamination that would necessitate redundant federal regulation,’ said Kathleen Sgamma, vice president of government and public affairs for Western Energy Alliance, a Denver-based trade group.”

Why would LAT reporters Neela Banerjee and Wes Venteicher think Sgamma’s view on fracking’s safety was worth quoting but not Interior Secretary Sally Jewell’s?

1) Incompetence

2) Incompetence + Bias

3) Incompetence + Pack Journalism

4) Incompetence + Bias + Pack Journalism

Because it absolutely is not …

5) Good Journalism

I’m still waiting for a single logical explanation as to why California journalists always omit the president’s views on fracking, which would go a long way toward countering green claims.

For now, the most logical assumption is that green journos don’t want to counter green claims.

5 comments

Write a comment
  1. jimmydeeoc
    jimmydeeoc 17 November, 2013, 11:51

    I vote bias at the top.

    One wonders about the background of an “Energy and Environment” reporter at LAT, such as Banerjee. A BA in Physics or Chemistry, perhaps? LOL…. Of course not.

    More than likely a resume chock full of “activism” and other placard waving. Look at that hippie clown they have (or had, as I haven’t checked in a while) as the “environment” reporter the OCR. At least his predecessor, Gary Robbins, knew something about and had an interest in science. But he bolted for the U-T few years back, and now we are left with Hippie Pat, whose idea of “reporting” is nothing more than endlessly reciting tired Green bromides no different than you might hear in Sproul Plaza.

    Reply this comment
  2. Ted Steele, CEO
    Ted Steele, CEO 18 November, 2013, 07:54

    Fracking??

    Hmmm…600 hi pressure chemicals shot into the water table deep beneath our homes—– what could possibly go wrong?

    Cue the Chamber of Commerce Fracking Institute response…in…3….2….1…….

    Reply this comment
    • eck
      eck 18 November, 2013, 20:13

      Well, no …. It’s well below the water table. Actually, read something factual before you spout off. Like what the Interior Sec had to say.

      Reply this comment
  3. S Moderation Douglas
    S Moderation Douglas 18 November, 2013, 10:06

    Now we are willing to accept the presidents opinion?

    Is that selective credibility?

    Reply this comment
  4. Ulysses Uhaul
    Ulysses Uhaul 19 November, 2013, 10:20

    Teddy has a point….think on it. ….

    Fair and Balanced.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply



Related Articles

UC drops investments in response to activists’ gripes

For the second time in three months, University of California pension administrators have ended their investments in specific industries after

Bonds used for affordable housing survive in final GOP tax bill

The good news for California affordable housing advocates is that a bond/tax credit program that they rely on is part

Detroit police chief, former LAPD cop: Carry a gun

California just imposed a passel of new gun laws with the new year. A former LAPD cop urges the opposite: