Today’s consolidated and "market-directed" media will not always cover specific subjects as you do, e.g. industrial pollution, water systems, wildlife habitats, land speculation, and so forth. It’s up to independent publishers like you to investigate, gather input, bring to public attention and fairly report. Policies and activities do have effects, and reporting the good and the bad consequences doesn’t mean you are getting "too political."
The administration in Washington seems bent on privatizing, meddling with, or destroying the systems and agencies that assure at least some accountability about public assets. This makes the kinds of reporting you do all the more important. And since when does having a reporter follow the processes in Washington mean you are wild-eyed environmentalists?
How sad it is that so many people insist on shooting the messengers when they don’t agree with what they read!
Marian M. Leonard
- The taxpayer money that fuels federal land transfer demands
- Latest: California fracking companies inject protected aquifers with wastewater
- Obama's preemptive strike to reform Endangered Species Act
- Wyoming trespass law is the latest in grazing battle
- Sightseeing at an open pit mine in Arizona copper country
- Bette Korber on The Los Angeles wetland wars
- Garrett Allen on The view from 31,000 feet: A philosopher looks at fracking
- Robb Cadwell on The view from 31,000 feet: A philosopher looks at fracking
- Amy & Chris Gulick on The view from 31,000 feet: A philosopher looks at fracking
- Richard H Ernst on The taxpayer money that fuels federal land transfer demands