Despite the ongoing popularity of the “experts say” trope among traditional media, or perhaps because of it, there is a massive crisis of confidence in the Western world these days in traditional elite institutions from science to government to journalism. And if you’re wondering why, which most CDN readers may not be, Michael Shellenberger reminds us of a scandalous tale (not entirely recent, but we missed it until now) of the mainstream press parroting government, well, “misinformation” on the question of whether offshore wind energy is killing whales, particularly endangered North Atlantic Right Whales off New England. Green transition zealots in power said no, and newspapers repeated it. But the answer was actually yes. What a world, in which oil companies save whales and environmentalists casually slaughter them.
We’re particularly drawn to this story because of a recent CDN item about how oil saved the whales… twice. First, major advances in refining petroleum products from the mid-19th century onwards more or less eliminated the voracious American appetite for whale oil for lamps. And then a resurgence in whaling in the 20th century for more obscure industrial applications for things from blubber to bone was again suppressed by, among other things, advances in oil-based synthetic products.
There was also, of course, a push from the “left”, especially the nascent environmental movement incarnate in outfits like Greenpeace, to get governments to ban the trade. But not all governments listened to public pressure, or cared a whit about it, so eliminating demand was key to eliminating supply. Despite which “Save the whales” became a classic rallying cry, even a satirical trope, about leftists. So how can they be so indifferent now?
In this case it’s no joke. Instead, as authors Gabrielle Haigh, Madeleine Rowley, Phebe Smith “and 2 others” in the article Shellenberger cites write:
“Data analyst Lisa Linowes found that increased boat traffic from offshore wind construction strongly correlates with whale deaths. Researcher Rob Rand discovered the wind industry engaging in high-decibel sonar mapping, which scientists say can split mothers from their calves, send them to poorer feeding grounds to escape the noise, and drive them into highly trafficked boat lanes where they face a higher likelihood of being struck by a boat and killed.”
What’s more, and worse:
“The people who run the U.S. government agencies in charge of protecting the whales have either conducted similar research, come to the same conclusions, and covered them up, or they had not done the research, in which case they lied to the public when they claimed to have looked into the matter and determined that the wind industry was not behind the whale deaths. Either way, the killing of whales by the wind industry and the role of the US government is one of the greatest environmental scandals in the world.”
It’s also not a joke that while progressives typically believe big companies and conservative politicians are rigging the game in favour of plutocrats, when you find large handouts to firms it’s surprisingly often for “progressive” causes including, of course, EVs and EV batteries. Genuinely free markets don’t involve subsidies. And it’s not a joke, though it is the punchline here, that while journalists pride themselves on being crusading defenders of the little guy, or today person, and generally think the left is the same, those same journalists parroted these deceptions with wilful ignorance.
As Haigh et al. go on to note:
“the mainstream news media have to date not only failed to cover it, they have themselves spread misinformation. The New York Times’ top environment writer, Lisa Friedman, relied entirely on US government sources when she called the connection between the wind industry and whale deaths ‘misinformation.’ AP also relied entirely on government sources when it ran an article sub-headlined, ‘Whale Deaths Not Linked to Wind Prep Work.’ USA Today dismissed the connection as ‘cynical disinformation.’ And the Guardian falsely suggested that conservationists raising the alarm had secret ties to ‘right-wing think tanks’ and the oil and gas industry.”
It’s not the only important case of this sort. And some investigative journalist somewhere should do a major piece or series on how media meant to be keeping a gimlet eye on the state instead broadcast its propaganda and called it “experts say” or “following the science” and labeled dissent “misinformation” or even “denial”. COVID and especially the smothering of the lab-leak hypothesis certainly spring to mind. But for now we simply urge any remaining media outlets who want to restore their credibility, and not by sneering at the rubes, to go after this story including doing the actual hard-boiled research for which newspapers were once perhaps unjustly famous and are now infamous for skipping.
As that article added, any publications including those that to their credit made some mention of legitimate concerns:
“could have done what Environmental Progress and Public did and bought publicly available data on boat traffic and whale strandings, asked a data analyst to look for correlations, and worked with a scientist to conduct underwater acoustic measurements near a boat hired by the wind industry to map the ocean floor with sonar. Instead, these publications promoted the wind industry. The Guardian ran an article headlined, ‘Winds of change: celebrating 30 years of offshore wind energy.’ Politico called offshore wind a ‘green energy panacea’ and the ‘key to European jobs, growth, and industrial revival.’ And Reuters ran a story headlined, ‘Achieve 30 GW of Offshore Wind by 2030.’”
This story ought to be irresistible. It has everything, doesn’t it? Sinister corporations in league with obtuse or greedy politicians work to line their own pockets while driving charismatic megafauna to the brink of extinction and official guardians snooze or worse. And if the press covered that kind of stuff instead of functioning as a branch of the Ministry of Truth, who knows? They might even start selling papers again.
Whenever i see the term "experts say" in the media, I automatically assume that some journalist is trying to pull a fast one on me. Which experts are you refering to, and what are they supposedly expert in? Or are you just being lazy and can't be bothered to look up your sources and are just repeating something you vaguely remember someone saying sometime?
Along with "experts say" ,every time a government official says "misinformation" I assume the item is true but embarrassing to the group making that claim . Caveat emptor.
Isn't it interesting the green movement became the people they claimed to oppose as soon as they became "the establishment".....which they also claimed to despise!
We need a way to "like" some of these insightful comments.
I love reading them as much as the article.