Bush asked for weaker smog standard

Platapus · 03-16-08, 12:30 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/....ap/index.html

Sounds pretty bad right? Nice strong headline that clearly portrays the underlaying story.

Well almost. You have to read a few more paragraphs to understand that what the headlines said was not really what happened.

It appears that there are two EPA standards for smog.

1. Human health

2. Public Welfare

The standards are different and have different quantities they are restricting. There is debate whether one should be higher, both should be higher and debate is good.

The President wants both standards to be the same. Whether this is the correct decision or not can be debated. What is clear is that despite the headlines, Bush was not "asking for a weaker smog standard", he was asking for them to match.

This fuels my ever growing disgust about the media. Report the news, let the readers love or hate bush as they see fit. But make the headlines at least accurately convey the meat of the article. How many people not willing to read a few paragraphs (95% of the citizens I think) will gloss over this headline and get the wrong idea.

Whether the standards are good bad or indifferent is not the issue here, what my issue here is why does the media mislead the reader like this?

"Bush asked for consolidated smog standards" does not have the same emotional appeal I guess.

Letum · 03-16-08, 12:46 PM

Does consolidatng the standards mean that either standard will be lower than if they are not consolidated?

Platapus · 03-16-08, 01:25 PM

Yes the proposed public welfare standard will be lowered to match the human health standard.

The primary debate is that the public welfare standard is more focused on long term environmental risks and the human health more short term focus on humans.

Some believe that the two standards should be separate as the have different focuses.

I don't know enough to hazard an opinion one way or the other on this issue.

03-16-08, 12:30 PM	#1
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,361 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	Bush asked for weaker smog standard http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/....ap/index.html Sounds pretty bad right? Nice strong headline that clearly portrays the underlaying story. Well almost. You have to read a few more paragraphs to understand that what the headlines said was not really what happened. It appears that there are two EPA standards for smog. 1. Human health 2. Public Welfare The standards are different and have different quantities they are restricting. There is debate whether one should be higher, both should be higher and debate is good. The President wants both standards to be the same. Whether this is the correct decision or not can be debated. What is clear is that despite the headlines, Bush was not "asking for a weaker smog standard", he was asking for them to match. This fuels my ever growing disgust about the media. Report the news, let the readers love or hate bush as they see fit. But make the headlines at least accurately convey the meat of the article. How many people not willing to read a few paragraphs (95% of the citizens I think) will gloss over this headline and get the wrong idea. Whether the standards are good bad or indifferent is not the issue here, what my issue here is why does the media mislead the reader like this? "Bush asked for consolidated smog standards" does not have the same emotional appeal I guess. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

03-16-08, 12:46 PM	#2
Letum Navy Seal Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: York - UK Posts: 6,079 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	Does consolidatng the standards mean that either standard will be lower than if they are not consolidated? __________________

03-16-08, 01:25 PM	#3
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,361 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	Yes the proposed public welfare standard will be lowered to match the human health standard. The primary debate is that the public welfare standard is more focused on long term environmental risks and the human health more short term focus on humans. Some believe that the two standards should be separate as the have different focuses. I don't know enough to hazard an opinion one way or the other on this issue. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.