Please, Leader, stop insulting people who speak up about the loss of biodiversity by publicly labeling them tree huggers.
Google the phrase and you’ll find it’s a derogatory jab meant …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you had an active account on our previous website, then you have an account here. Simply reset your password to regain access to your account.
If you did not have an account on our previous website, but are a current print subscriber, click here to set up your website account.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
* Having trouble? Call our circulation department at 360-385-2900, or email our support.
Please log in to continue |
|
Please, Leader, stop insulting people who speak up about the loss of biodiversity by publicly labeling them tree huggers.
Google the phrase and you’ll find it’s a derogatory jab meant to demean people as foolish, annoying, overly emotional, and irrational. There were Ph.D scientists at last weekend’s rally, yet the Leader chose to begin with that insult. It set the tone for interpreting everything that followed. The photos sent a clear message, too — the one labeled “protesters” was blurry and disorganized-looking because it was taken after the rally, yet the other was in-focus, attentive, and labeled “loggers and their families.”
I believe there were also families on the protester side, but portraying them as an indistinct bloc furthered the perception. The science that was finally discussed on Page 8 came too late to correct the bias, if readers even got that far.
Environmental advocacy comes from a deep and evidence-based conviction that we humans are destroying at an unsustainable pace what’s left of the ecological services that nature provides. Countless peer-reviewed scientific studies have shown that old-growth forests mitigate the effects of climate change and loss of biodiversity, and that allowing legacy forests to survive and become old-growth can help mitigate timber harvest elsewhere. But it’s also about respect for, and a sense of belonging to, an ecosystem much larger than us. When presenting both sides of a story, good journalism suggests that our hometown paper should pay more attention to nuance and not use stereotypes that dismiss the seriousness of one side’s position. With what’s in store for us in adverse climate events coming sooner than later, there’s not enough time left to play games.
Karen Sullivan
PORT TOWNSEND
2 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
CodexSeraphinianus
Sorry this happened to you Karen. It’s not the first time they’ve done this. Biased reporting. No one deserves that in any form. It should go against all the tolerance and inclusion this locale has been reciting, yet dare I say, if you don’t align with their views you are out. There are an abnormal amount of instances here over the past several years regarding this issue. Best of luck and fairness in the future in your endeavors.
Thursday, March 30 Report this
Justin Hale
Asking the leader for unbiased reporting is a big ask. Like way too much of what passes for journalism these daze the Leader makes no attempt at fair and balanced reporting, read their reporting of the incident at the local pool and the demonstrations that it spawned. read the blogs that Tom C. has been posting for many years that are mostly devoted to bad-mouthing the past POTUS and Republicans in general. Look at the political cartoons the Leader publishes all anti-Trump, anti Republican.
No Karen, if you want fair and balanced you will have to look elsewhere, you sure as hel won't find it in the Mis-Leader.
Thursday, March 30 Report this