Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Saving Mary Cheney | Poster of the Day »

Friday, June 1, 2007

Changing the Climate, the Seattle Times Way

posted by on June 1 at 12:59 PM

The Seattle Times has gotten a lot of, um, mileage out of its “Seattle Times Climate Challenge,” a month-long push to get Times readers to cut their carbon footprints and “share their stories.” According to a self-congratulatory piece by Times editor-at-large Mike Fancher,

Our readers are very environmentally conscious, and they often ask what they can do personally to make a difference. So, we thought the “Climate Challenge” would be an engaging way to provide useful information that inspires readers to act, while also learning from each other. The Times would provide some tools and ideas, but reader motivation would take it from there.

In yesterday’s wrap-up of readers’ experiences, Times reporter Alex Fryer concluded that readers who participated in the Challenge produced substantially fewer emissions than the national average.

I might be a bit more impressed with the Times’ green makeover if they weren’t simultaneously running the “NWSource Great Gas Giveaway,” in which 32 winners will get a $200 gas card. The grand prize? Free gas for a year. Way to “make a difference,” guys.

RSS icon Comments

1

To be fair, NWsource is operated by an entirely different department as is the marketing department that is probably giving the gas away.

Not an employee, just annoyed when people complain about editorial biases and conflicting messages when they're actually comparing separate autonomous departments. If you wanted consistency among them, you'd also have to give up any bias-free reporting that may still remain.

Posted by ljg | June 1, 2007 1:09 PM
2

Well, ljg, the WaPo says that too about how their editorials have nothing to do with their news coverage, but noone believes it.

That said, one thing most people don't grok about Global Warming:

The biggest changes will occur in the group of people who drive trucks, SUVs, and low mpg cars today.

If I drive a 36 mpg car (which I do) only 2-3 days a week for a commute of 2 miles and I change to a Toyota Prius hybrid, I have MUCH LESS IMPACT than a person who drives a gas hog 13 mpg SUV by their lonesome from Covington to Everett each day who buys a 15 mpg SUV to replace it.

Want to fix global warming? Get everyone to buy a replacement car - new or used - that gets just 5 mpg better than what they use today.

Sure, some may ride a bike or take a bus, but they probably were ALREADY creating very little in the way of emissions.

Posted by Will in Seattle | June 1, 2007 1:19 PM
3

Wow, cool-- thanks for alerting me to the free gas sweepstakes.

Posted by DrewVSea | June 1, 2007 1:20 PM
4

You gotta love a reporter -- oh, maybe not -- who zings the Times on ethics after doing a piece on the nightclub rules, with suggestions on what to say, so she can cover people saying what she wants to write.

Now Erica, just what are you going to say about those HUGE revisions to the mayor's plan by those heroic council members who you championed tirelessly? Don't bite hands that feed you!

That's amore.

Posted by It just keeps getting Stranger and Stranger-er | June 1, 2007 1:26 PM
5

Self-Congratulatory piece? I'm patting myself on the back right now for rightful anticipation. I look forward to the post next Tuesday about an "impressive" article about to be put to be press. I love my insight, my advertisements (often upstaging the piece), my admiration for fellow writers. Erica, hearts go out to your self-centeredness

Posted by Gene Scheider | June 1, 2007 1:39 PM
6

This morning, while walking past the Quaker-Friends place in the U, I had an epiphany, saved the planet, & cured the heartbreak of homelessness.

According to a desultory story in The Times last year, compassionate progressive Quaker-Friends kicked out about a dozen homeless men & women who had been allowed to grovel in the gravel of the Quaker Compound. For years there had been an all-nite encampment, around the Quaker perimeter, of the property-challenged whose only real real-estate was cardboard & Thunderbird. Compassionate progressive Friends gave the friendless a bed for their heads, a bed of rocks, arguably a big step up from being on the bricks.

Then it ended in an instant: too many secular sacraments going on around the perimeter, or something, but signs went up & cops came out & Josephine, Rudy, Stanley, & all the rest were back on the bricks or huddled in doorways. (That's Josephine, near Lander Hall) from dusk to dawn.

Here's the epiphany part: Fat-cat plutocrat populists like Al Gore and John Edwards want to assuage their liberal-limo Gulfstream guilt. They go through a shameless sham of paying mansion penance to dummy carbon-trading cartels ... sort of paying themselves guilt money for the carbon they burn while heating their pools.

So why, instead, don't they pay Josephine, Rudy, and Stanley? Good people whose 'footprint' isn't much bigger than every breath they take & every exhalation they make?

Why don't Women in Black, squeezing dollars out of your liberal guilt for a Homeless Monument, or some damn thing, do some damn good for the homeless? Why don't they shake down Gore & Edwards to help Rudy buy the carbon-neutral anti-freeze (40s preferred) of his choice?

And why didn't ECB go after the unfriendly Friends as she surely would have gone after Mars Hill or Hutch? Can you imagine the Stranger's knock on mere Christianity if Hutch, say, had "allowed" his homeless brothers & sisters to sleep on parking-lot rocks before giving his brothers & sisters a boot to the head?

Posted by sandalista | June 1, 2007 1:41 PM
7

"Can you imagine the Stranger's knock on mere Christianity if Hutch, say, had "allowed" his homeless brothers & sisters to sleep on parking-lot rocks before giving his brothers & sisters a boot to the head?"

No. I also can't imagine how many brain cells I lost after reading your retarded post.

Posted by Mr. Poe | June 1, 2007 2:14 PM
8

Seeing as the Stranger's major contributon to the local environment has been to discourage use of the bus system in favor of cars, I'd say EB has attained a new mark of hypocrisy with her latest drivel.

Posted by tell me another one | June 1, 2007 6:27 PM
9

Hey, Erica, just to show you that I can be constructive, here's a helpful hint:

No need next time to say that Mike Fancher wrote a self-congratulatory piece. It's utterly redundant. Fancher is incapable of writing anything that is not self-congratulatory.

Posted by ivan | June 1, 2007 8:23 PM
10

eapb zogfic wlzkqnja ruyhmxbo sjeuqckm feyruszp cbxejht

Posted by cbuw culp | June 6, 2007 3:53 AM
11

sqezpyif hdonbt cxyrqvg twljrhoa gike dmnzopxeb gtcfu http://www.wbksjg.izojwbe.com

Posted by mfqpseu etisroa | June 6, 2007 3:54 AM
12

Hallo!
Check this out!
*

Posted by Celestria_vr | June 12, 2007 4:13 AM
13


And some more..
*

Posted by Cristian_is | June 12, 2007 4:14 AM
14

MSN I NIIPET
MSN

Posted by Bill | June 12, 2007 12:24 PM
15

MSN I NIIPET
MSN

Posted by Bill | June 12, 2007 12:24 PM
16

MSN I NIIPET
MSN

Posted by Bill | June 12, 2007 12:24 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).