events_sidebar_calendar_header.gif

add_event_1.jpg

what_hap_signup_300x45.jpg

community_header.jpg
bg_13_96x96.jpgboa_13_96x96.jpgvg13_96x96.jpgobits_96x96.jpgam13_96x96.jpgannounce_96x96.jpg
SoA12_300x60.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Home / Articles / Editorial / Letters /  NEWS editor not unlike editor responsible for the Dust Bowl
. . . . . . .
Sunday, February 24,2013

NEWS editor not unlike editor responsible for the Dust Bowl

To the Editor:

Economic and environmental disasters do not happen by themselves. Every cycle of boom and bust has a crusading editor behind it or the public would never fall for the scam.

As described in painstaking detail by Timothy Egan in "The Worst Hard Times," the greatest environmental disaster of the 20th century was the Dust Bowl of the 1930s, and it was entirely man-made. It was fueled by the fantasy that "Crain follows the plough." This slogan was repeated over and over by the government, the railroads and a crusading editor named John McCarty until enough people believed it to move out West to Oklahoma. They plowed up the drought-resistant buffalo grass and replaced it with water-loving wheat, thinking to spin gold from straw. But rain did not follow the plough, only disaster. And so the people suffered, and John McCarty moved to another state, where he started another newspaper.

The power of the press must therefore be considered as an echo chamber for utopian fantasies initiated by industry propagandists and promoted by politicians desperate for an easy fix to economic problems they brought upon themselves (e.g., Iraq war) without raising taxes. Simple-minded government-is-the-problem exemplars aside, crusading editors should stand on higher ground.

Athens' own version of the crusading editor is Terry Smith of The Athens NEWS. God love him, he never tires of promoting the fracking industry and deriding citizens and civic leaders who oppose it. Presumably he thinks that taking a stand on a controversial issue makes him a man of principle. Perhaps that is even true. In editorials spanning the past two years, Smith seems sincerely to believe that deep-well hydraulic fracturing and wastes disposal is coming to Athens County or is already here, and that it will bring many economic benefits to our community.

But the facts in North Dakota and Pennsylvania and Youngstown do not support the substance of Mr. Smith's crusade, nor of the industry, nor of the state government's unjust and privileged laws that place unsustainable industry profits above the needs of the environment and the majority of human beings living here.

Man-made environmental disasters are not hard to predict if only the memory would not fade. A boom based on utopian fantasies is not sustainable and will surely collapse under the weight of geology and market forces and simple physics.

Dick McGinn
Bill of Rights Committee
Associate Professor Emeritus, Ohio University

Graham Drive
Athens

 

  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
REPLY TO THIS COMMENT

Killing the Messenger?  I mean the News...

The editor has never come across as a crusader or promoter for the fracking industry.  He is suggesting:

It's most likely coming, like it or not, to Athens County: if it is, profit from it.

The city of Athens "banning" fracking activity within a 20 mile radius is ludicrous within our current legal environment (it is).

 

These resource extraction activities (injection wells, hydro-fracking) may not demonstrate evidence of environmental harm for  decades to come and when they do, we'll be in mitigation mode, versus prevention mode.  That is reason enough to fight for prevention.  Don't throw the editor under the bus for pointing out the obvious flaws in your strategy for this fight.

 

 

REPLY TO THIS COMMENT

Fact is fracking has been around for 70 years.  Any "environmental harm" if there is any, would have been documented by now.

I find it stunning that Smith thinks fracking might show environmental damage in a little while, but man-made global warming, caused by fossil fuels, is so obvious (though actual scientific evidence proves otherwise).

The bottom line- frackin is safe.  Man-made global warming is not settled.  And, regardless, no elected group of people has the legal right to tell others not in their jurisdiction how to live.  

It is asinine and absurd on its face.  As much as Progressives wish it weren't true, the reality is that we don't live in a  full blown dictatorship.  Not yet, anyway.

 

b
James, If you're being the least bit sincere, you'll admit that the fracturing today is very little like the method of 70 years ago. Your BS on global warming is consistent and baseless. Bottom line, fracking is not proven safe. There are many incidents that call that into question. Not the least of which is the earthquakes (which have been documented). Why don't you contact some of the people in this article, http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_27073.cfm , and listen to what they have to say. Do you feel these chemicals are safe? What causes those health problems? Among the hundreds of toxic chemicals used in fracking are arsenic, benzene, ethylene glycol (antifreeze), formaldehyde, lead, toluene, Uranium-238. and Radium-226. The American Academy of Pediatrics’ list of common health problems from exposure to fracking chemicals includes autism, asthma, cancer, heart disease, kidney failure, infertility, birth defects, allergies, endocrine diseases and immune system disorders.

 

I am very sincere. Fracking is even safer on the environment than it was 70 years ago.

Give me the scientific proof of all the anti-fracking claims, and there are none, and I'll line up against it. Otherwise, you're wasting your time.*

The real issue here has two parts: one, there is a lot of money in green energy and fracking threatens the honey pot. Two, environmentalism and its statist way is not as much scientific as it is a ways to control human behavior. Basically they don't like the free enterprise, capitalist-friendly way individuals can secure better lives for themselves via fracking.

It's socialism with a tiny bit of pseudo-science speak.

Real proof, real science on fracking. Gasland doesn't have it. No one in the News has shown scientific evidence. It is all anecdotal, scary ghost stories of the 21st century.

Evidence, please.

*There is a town in Texas that "scientifically" found out that there was dirty cancer-causing air produced by fracking. However, after a lawsuit was filed by the fracking companies, it was discovered that the scientific study was a)not scientific in the least and b)was made up. That's what we're up against.

Watch "Frack Nation".

 

 

 
 
Close
Close
Close