On August 20, The Boston Globe ran the following story: Maine Wind Farm not Soothing to all Ears (link to the whole story follows://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2010/08/30/maine_wind_farm_not_soothing_to_all_ears/). Ironically, I had just been on Vinalhaven and gawked at the 135 foot high turbines as I rode past them on my bike. "Fantastic, futuristic, way to go" I thought until I read the cranky (or so I thought) Globe article. Seems transplant residents Art Lindgren and his wife are leading a small but vocal band of naysayers to wind power. They've got noise measuring devices and charts and a lot of wordy wind (no pun). Basically, after reading the Globe article I thought them all crankpots. I had been by the turbines and had heard nothing.
Today, another article popped up about the same wind turbine dust-up on Vinalhaven. But this time the story ran bottom of the fold, front-page, of The New York Times. (link to article follows: For those Near the Miserable Hum of Clean Energy....http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/06/business/energy-environment/06noise.html). According to The New York Times, not only have noise complaints emminated from little Vinalhaven in Penobscott Bay, but also in Illinois, Texas, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Massachusetts, among other states. Beyond our borders, complaints have arisen in Canada and Great Britain. Perhaps the Lindgren's are not so cranky after all.
But I have my own personal crank with the issue: Why didn't the Globe put this story in context? Why didn't they give it any teeth? It makes a difference if an incident is a one-off or if there is evidence of the same phenomenon occurring in other places.
Like Molly's complaint about the Boston-based MacArthur genius grant story, the Globe once again failed to put the wind turbine news piece in a wider context. Yes, there is a local angle to both the wind turbine and MacArthur grant recipient stories, but imagine how much richer and more meaty each of the stories would have been if our local news makers were put in the context of the big picture, where they belong.
Fran, as you mentioned in your comment on my blog entry about the MacArthur story, the Globe does seem to have a desire to shoot itself in its local foot by forcing all news to be distilled through a New England lens. I wonder if the fact that the New York Times owns the Globe? (It does, still, doesn't it?)
ReplyDeleteyes, the globe is still owned by the new york times. perhaps the editorial directive comes from new york to better secure the nytimes pre-eminent position as paper of record? i have also met many globe journalists who love the culture and scale of the globe. the paper may not aspire to be any different than it is??
ReplyDelete