I’ll be honest. It was not easy writing that last post without launching into a lot of arguements. I did it NOT because I agree with BP’s side (because I don’t — I don’t think the trade-off is worth it), but because I think the topic of responsible reporting is important, and even though I agree with the Tribune reporter and think he did an OK job with the facts (I can’t really see where he twisted anything), the fact is: the article does show bias. And that’s not right. I get pissed off listening to how FOX news interprets the facts, so I can’t be a hypocrite and pretend not to see it on the other side, even if its the side I’m on.
Of course, if you search for BP on Technorati today, you’ll see a great many posts on the same topic, and most people have strayed from the question of journalism ethics and instead turned it into an environmentalists vs. BP arguement. (Poor, poor big business, right? Especially under the Bush administration — they just don’t have a chance.) I’m sure that’s exactly what the company wanted and I have to admit that they have a very savvy spin doctor working their damage control. Way to go whoever thought to get a bunch of personal blogs to talk about this.
The whole thing is fascinating to me on so many different levels.