Because of the Bakken shale oil, the three states with the lowest unemployment rates are Montana, South Dakota, and North Dakota. The rates in those states range between 3.2 and 3.4 percent. The oil is providing energy and jobs. You would think that the Obama administration (and the New York Times) would be celebrating the success of those states. Well, think again.
Yesterday's New York Times contained the following correction:
"An article on May 7 about the Obama administration's appointment of a panel of experts to find ways to make hydraulic fracturing safer misstated the prevalence of cases in which fluids from the gas drilling process have been proven to have contaminated drinking water. There are few documented cases, not numerous ones, although federal and state investigations into reports of such incidents are continuing."
Even the correction is misleading. John Hinderaker at Power Line posted the part of the original New York Times' story that the correction applied to:
"Hydraulic fracturing involves the high-pressure injection of fluids into underground shale formations to break open natural gas pockets. The technique, which has been in limited use for decades, is expected to significantly increase recovery of domestic gas supplies and keep prices moderate for years.
"But the process also pours millions of gallons of dangerous chemicals into the ground and into wastewater treatment systems, which in some cases cannot remove all the potential toxins. There are also numerous documented cases in which fracking fluids leaked into aquifers and contaminated drinking water."
The New York Times then attacked Republicans on the issue:
"Within hours, House Republicans issued a press release denouncing the study as wasteful, duplicative, and another example of red tape run amok. They said that fracking has been used safely for more than 60 years and that the Environmental Protection Agency already has sufficient authority to regulate it."
The misinformation led to an attack on Republicans by the New York Times. The correction did not correct that attack in any way. The New York Times had successfuly attacked the Republicans and cast a shadow on the development of a resource that could help make America more energy independent. Mission accomplished.
John Hinderaker concludes:
"So the Times reported the story so as to make Republicans look stupid or venal. In fact, the House Republicans were right: hydraulic fracking has a long, safe history. We need to get going on developing our vast natural gas resources, not appoint another panel to stall development in the name of a barely-existent environmental problem. But only the handful of readers who saw the correction would have any idea how misleading the Times' original article was."
I wonder how many people who read the correction understood how the initial article was used as an attack piece on Republicans and an attack on the efforts of Americans to become energy independent.
Leave a comment