The government has a responsibility to address the disproportionate infliction of environmental harms on communities of color, from the spraying of toxic pesticides to the siting of polluting factories. But do they do it, and if not, why not?
Chris Savage about the Flint, Michigan, water-poisoning
CounterSpin interview with David Baron about air polluters
Two recent stories that are hard to miss, but about which some might say most media are missing the point. First, an anti-abortion group is releasing ‘sting’ videos claiming to show that Planned Parenthood profits from the sale of fetal body parts, but rather than focus on sorting facts from flame-fanning, media are spending time scoring the grandstanding match among Republican politicians. Jodi Jacobsen of RH Reality Check will join us to talk about who might profit most from this story.
Also on the show: The killing of the popular African lion known as Cecil by a bounty hunter led some into an unhelpful parlor game of lions vs. people: which do you care about? Journalists could move the conversation off that dime with a thoughtful examination of the state of animal preservation and the impact of extinction on us all. What might that look like? We’ll hear from journalist John R. Platt, who writes about extinction as well as other environmental issues for Scientific American among other outlets.
It hasn’t been probing media coverage that’s roughened the road for the corporate power grab known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership; public interest activism is the missing piece in much top-down media coverage. Plus: To hear media tell it, the EPA found that fracking doesn’t pose any widespread harm to drinking water. Is that really what the science said?