I Would So Fire Gary Chittim
Gary Chittim is the "environmental" reporter for KING-5, the NBC affiliate in Seattle. He often uncritically accepts the claims of environmentalists, such as in a recent story he did about flame retardant PBDE.
Chittim handwaved at the fact that there is no evidence that PBDE causes health problems, yet he cheerleaded for the people who were trying to get rid of it, and in an attempt to unreasonably scare the public showed how product after product had -- OMG! -- traces of PBDE.
If this had been a Penn & Teller sketch about dihydrogen monoxide, we would have laughed, but this was the real thing, and not significantly different: there is simply no evidence PBDE is a problem, after decades of use; but Chittim is right there pushing their claims along, falsely repeating the word "toxic" over and over as if it were true (in fact, PBDE can be toxic, but that does not mean it is toxic; again, the same goes with water, which can also be toxic).
Last night he was doing a story about a local military base supposedly dumping chemicals, as claimed by employees. He said, as a matter of fact, that "[t]hese workers have nothing to gain and a lot to lose by coming forward." What kind of moronic reporter thinks there is no possibility that people in their position might have ulterior motives?
I'll tell you what kind: a reporter that is subjectively biased in favor of environmentalist claims, whether they are true or not.
Chittim handwaved at the fact that there is no evidence that PBDE causes health problems, yet he cheerleaded for the people who were trying to get rid of it, and in an attempt to unreasonably scare the public showed how product after product had -- OMG! -- traces of PBDE.
If this had been a Penn & Teller sketch about dihydrogen monoxide, we would have laughed, but this was the real thing, and not significantly different: there is simply no evidence PBDE is a problem, after decades of use; but Chittim is right there pushing their claims along, falsely repeating the word "toxic" over and over as if it were true (in fact, PBDE can be toxic, but that does not mean it is toxic; again, the same goes with water, which can also be toxic).
Last night he was doing a story about a local military base supposedly dumping chemicals, as claimed by employees. He said, as a matter of fact, that "[t]hese workers have nothing to gain and a lot to lose by coming forward." What kind of moronic reporter thinks there is no possibility that people in their position might have ulterior motives?
I'll tell you what kind: a reporter that is subjectively biased in favor of environmentalist claims, whether they are true or not.
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
Leave a comment