Lately, I have been doing some more reading on the Tongass National Forest. In my research, I came across a group-effort report by Alaska Public Radio and its KFSK affiliate in Sitka (Matt Lichtenstein).
The problem with this “report” is common to many Public Radio news reports. The spot starts out well with a pretty objective summary, and pulls a sleight-of-hand by censoring some of the reactions to the Revised Tongass Forest Management Plan. Lichtenstein rounds up the usual suspects for an “accurate” portrayal of what folks in SE Alaska really think.
0.00-1:59 Good summary of what you need to know to understand the debate.
2:00-END Focused on reaction to the report. The following players were mentioned:
1. Timber Industry – will comment when they read the report
2. Don Young – hadn’t read the report, but said he supports “timber management”
3. Sierra Club – Called the report “business as usual”
4. Conservation Society of Sitka – alluded to the proposals as not “based on sound science or economic reality”
5. Forest Service – waiting for the public hearings on the proposal (currently being held)
Number Four interview (Corrie Bosman, Conservation Director for Sitka Conservation Society) said the following:
If any of the local residents of SE Alaska who favored the proposals to harvest the Tongass were interviewed, Mr. Lichtenstein did not report their reactions or even allude to them. It would have been good reporting to at least interview someone from SE Alaska who depends on the harvesting of timber for their means of income. Apparently, Mr. Lichtenstein has no moral qualms with projecting a particular opinion onto the rest of SE Alaska (also known as lying). Sophistry is still alive, Socrates.
The problem with this “report” is common to many Public Radio news reports. The spot starts out well with a pretty objective summary, and pulls a sleight-of-hand by censoring some of the reactions to the Revised Tongass Forest Management Plan. Lichtenstein rounds up the usual suspects for an “accurate” portrayal of what folks in SE Alaska really think.
0.00-1:59 Good summary of what you need to know to understand the debate.
2:00-END Focused on reaction to the report. The following players were mentioned:
1. Timber Industry – will comment when they read the report
2. Don Young – hadn’t read the report, but said he supports “timber management”
3. Sierra Club – Called the report “business as usual”
4. Conservation Society of Sitka – alluded to the proposals as not “based on sound science or economic reality”
5. Forest Service – waiting for the public hearings on the proposal (currently being held)
Number Four interview (Corrie Bosman, Conservation Director for Sitka Conservation Society) said the following:
It’s pretty disappointing. You know, for many years now, folks in SE Alaska have been asking the Forest Service to protect pristine areas of the Forest and areas that are important for communities for subsistence, recreation and tourism, and rather than do that and respond to the public desire, what they’ve done is come out with a plan that proposes an action that is not really based on sound science or economic reality.
If any of the local residents of SE Alaska who favored the proposals to harvest the Tongass were interviewed, Mr. Lichtenstein did not report their reactions or even allude to them. It would have been good reporting to at least interview someone from SE Alaska who depends on the harvesting of timber for their means of income. Apparently, Mr. Lichtenstein has no moral qualms with projecting a particular opinion onto the rest of SE Alaska (also known as lying). Sophistry is still alive, Socrates.
No comments:
Post a Comment