Why don't journalists do good watchdog reporting? Because no one cares until there's anthrax in the mail or oil in your fishin' hole

I wrote a story for the Detroit Free Press once about the offbeat work of a state agency whose responsibilities included protecting Michigan citizens from chemical and biological terrorist attacks.

Editors hated the story. The believed it was needlessly hysterical and legitimized the work of a state agency that was wasting taxpayer money on a threat so remote to be laughable. They chopped it up and buried it on an inside page.

Then Al Quaeda’s 9/11/01 attacks and subsequent anthrax attacks sent shock and panic through the country. The obscure scientists in the story were suddenly Very Important People and the notion of exploring our readiness against chemical attacks suddenly seemed urgent and newsworthy.

A similar dynamic occurs with every high-profile disaster. No one – editors, citizens, politicians – no one, gives much of a rip about stories examining our readiness for disasters until the disasters strike. Then, it’s a free for all of blame and second guessing.

A good journalistic investigation might have unearthed – before the Gulf Oil Spill -- a pattern of corner cutting and noncompliance on the part of BP. But it would have been a real sleep inducer. No one would have cared.

Likewise, someone might have written or broadcast a story – before Michigan’s Kalamazoo River system oil spill -- noting that Enbridge Energy Partners has been warned about corrosion in their oil pipeline. Such a story might have quoted Hugh McDiarmid Jr., spokesman for an environmental group saying : “We believe corrosion in the pipeline needs to be corrected immediately, or we are courting disaster.”

It would have only been read by geeks and zealots with online identities like BAD*SSMUTHA, NO_TYRANNY, and AYNRAND. They would have written anonymous comments: “take your hippie ass and your Prius and move to Red China you spoiled jerk from the People’s Republic of Ann Arborstan” or “you’re an environmental wacko trying to kill the last jobs in Michigan that Two Penny Jenny Grandmole hasn’t already!.”

I thought of this dynamic the other day when I spoke with a reporter working on a story about oil pipelines in Michigan that may be completely unregulated. Apparently, there are certain sections of intrastate oil pipe that are not regulated or inspected for safety by any state or local agency. If there’s a federal agency that’s supposed to regulate them, they haven’t done so for decades.

But the reporter told me the story may never get reported. It would take a good month of digging for a story that’s complex and raises warning flags, but wouldn’t get much reader reaction even in the wake of the recent oil calamities. Meanwhile, there are plenty of stories that will get readers talking that can be reported in a week, a day, or a few hours.

There’s a lot of moaning about how the media doesn’t cover substantive issues anymore. But journalists know from experience that sober, lengthy analyses of important issues don’t sell newspapers, don't drive up viewership and never gets much feedback from readers. Until the public cares, media executives, editors and advertisers aren’t going to either.

Usually, sadly, that takes a disaster.

###

Life in the 48217: Not fair, and not justice in the state's most polluted ZIP code

“Environmental Justice” has always seems a poor piece of phraseology. The word “justice” makes me picture either courtroom drama or streets full of angry protesters.

What Environmental Justice http://bit.ly/957ALo means, simply, is that people should not have to live in places with disproportionately high levels of dangerous toxins because of their income level, their race, their neighborhood, or any other socio-economic factor.

That ideal is a long way from reality. Poor people get stuck with the shitty end of the pollution stick all the time. They’re the ones living next to the smokestacks and downstream from the toxic discharges. Many simply can’t afford to move elsewhere. And they lack the political clout (read: money) to change the status quo.

It’s especially unfair to kids. When you’re born into poverty, perhaps to a functionally illiterate parent in a decaying urban neighborhood, how much more of a kick in the teeth is it to have to deal with crippling asthma attacks from smokestack emissions or a nervous system gone haywire from lead? How many combative, violent 6 year olds are written off as bad apples when their issues were simply the neurological fallout of lead poisoning?

Anyway, this tremendous package of stories from the Detroit Free Press’ Tina Lam shows exactly how in the state’s most polluted ZIP code – The 48217 -- our least fortunate citizens get the shaft: http://bit.ly/aiUtMy It has a sidebar gadget that lets you enter your own ZIP code for a ranking, also.

But at least now we have a framework to begin addressing these issues. In 2007 Gov. Jennifer Granholm signed an executive directive that requires the state to begin considering Environmental Justice issues in its decisions: http://bit.ly/bH6ysT

There are concrete steps that can follow. At least 14 states limit how close schools and day care centers can be to sources of toxic discharges. Two states require that regulatory agencies take into account the cumulative impact of pollution sources when issuing permits.

There’s an old saying that a good judge of a society is how it treats its least fortunate citizens. We can do better by The 48217.
###

Breaking News: We're screwed!

U.S. Supreme Court refuses to hear Asian Carp case. Welcome to the Great Lakes, savages:
http://bit.ly/bVnu7E

Thanks to Gov. Granmholm and AG Mike Cox for trying to do the right thing. And thanks President Obama, for nothing.
###

GR Press writer: Bikers, hikers get shaft as combustion engine crew stacks Gov's advisory board

Do those of us who prefer nonmotorized means of enjoying our parks, woods and meadows get shafted when it comes to policy deliberations about how trails are managed? Howard Meyerson from the Grand Rapids Press thinks so: http://bit.ly/9qY6ir

He blames Gov. Jennifer Granholm for stacking the trails advisory committee with advocates of snowmobiling and ORVs to the exclusion of folks representing hikers, mountain bikers, cross-country skiers, backpackers, paddlers (water trails) equestrians and touring cyclists who use the state’s rail-to-trail system.

Good groups like the Michigan Trails and Greenways Alliance, with whom I collaborate on occasion, are left out of the discussions, Meyerson says.

But there are still a couple of unfilled seats on the committee, so Meyerson’s column comes at a good time.

If you want to tell the governor to include more “quiet” outdoor activities on the trails committee, call or write her here: http://bit.ly/zRMzQ

###

Michigan's "Meatgate": You can't handle the truth!

When sudden crisis threatens Michiganders, it’s critical to have a profession team of elected officials ready to respond like an efficient and deadly force of Navy SEALS.

Such was my gratitude yesterday when Lansing politicians dropped routine matters like school funding and budget balancing to react to Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s declaration that Saturday be “Michigan Meatout Day”: http://bit.ly/9zwk8L

State Senators went berserk and spent an hour debating the threat. Sen. Ron Jelinek said it was like telling Michiganders “not to buy Fords or Chevys.” Sen. Liz Brater stuck up for The Gov, and for “fruits, grains and vegetables” grown in Michigan.

The Michigan Farm Bureau was apoplectic. The Michigan United Conservation Clubs hastily created a “Meat Eaters Day” Facebook group that had almost 900 members before the end of the day: http://bit.ly/daGLp7 (“I’m a meatasaurus!” declared one Facebook friend)

The vegetarian group that created Meatout Day plaintively protested that “meat has no phytochemicals.”

Gubernatorial candidates gleefully piled on. The story went national. When CattleNetwork.com weighed in, people knew it was a big story.

My first reaction to Meatgate was indifference. As the furor grew I began to doubt. Perhaps I was just naïve? Blind to the threat of Meatout?

Then, the words of Col. Nathan Jessup in the movie “A Few Good Men” began echoing in my head: “You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use then as the backbone of a life trying to defend something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you," and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest that you pick up a weapon and stand a post.”

I stand humbled. All I can say is, Thank You Lansing.

###

NYT says enviros cooling on Obama; for Michigan and Gov. Granholm, it's deja vu

The New York Times had a piece yesterday about growing dissatisfaction with President Obama among environmental advocates.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/science/earth/18enviros.html?hpw

Among the reasons: Backing off on a carbon cap; enthusiastic support for so-called clean coal (an Orwellian moniker invented by the industry); new loan guarantees to push nuclear power forward, more offshore drilling and – I might add although I didn’t see it in the Times story – his refusal to slam the door on Asian Carp by closing the locks at Chicago.

The reactions are striking in the similarity to Michigan environmentalists’ reactions to Gov. Jennifer Granholm. Like Obama, she replaced an administration widely seen as hostile toward environmentalists and indifferent at best toward our natural resources. She, too, campaigned on strong and progressive environmental promises. And she, too, was the target of criticism when her results didn’t match her rhetoric.

Unmet promises are part and parcel of the job – political realities temper the grandest ambitions. But they also can be the result of a lack of conviction, lack of aggressiveness, or a lack of strategy.

I’m willing to give a President only 13 months into his tenure the benefit of the doubt.

But he loses me a little bit more every time he uses the ridiculous term “clean coal.”

 ###