- Home
- Activism
- Crime & Courts
- Economics
- Education
- Environment & Climate Change
- Examiner.com Archives
- Gun Control
- Healthcare
- History
- Human Interest / Inspirational
- LGBT Issues
- Politics
- Racial Issues
- Rants / Op-Eds
- Religion
- Right-Wing Hatred
- Social Issues
- States Issues
- The War on Drugs
- Veterans Issues
- Weird News
- Women's Issues
- World News
Fox News claims pollution is good for the environment
This article was originally published on July 12, 2012 on Examiner.com. 12,000 likes.
Recently a program on the Fox News network called “America’s Newsroom with Bill Hemmer and Martha MacCallum” aired a segment which claimed that pollution was good for the environment. Fox also published an article on the very same subject, while citing a study recently completed by Auburn University. In typical fashion Fox chose to trumpet out of context facts to get attention, while off-handedly mentioning their entire segment’s premise was untrue.
The study was commissioned by the Department of Defense, and the university was given $2.4 million to carry it out. The purpose of the study was to develop a plan that sequesters carbon in longleaf pine forests on military bases, therefore reducing the amount of carbon in the atmosphere.
During the course of the study Auburn researchers concluded that pollution has temporarily increased the growth rate of trees in the South Eastern regions of America, which historically removes more carbon from the environment than it produces. The study also found that the cause of this growth will lead to ground level ozone increases, which can develop into a myriad of other environmental conditions.
So while the study concluded that pollution did help the trees grow, it also found the pollution would ultimatley damage the environment. Fox, staying true to form, elected to show a graphic for the entire segment (see image above article) which claimed “STUDY: POLLUTION HELPED GROW FORREST ACROSS SOUTHEAST U.S.”
The article that was published on Foxnews.com was even more slanted. In total it contained 300 words, of which over 250 were written before the author elected to disclose that the entire premise of the article was false, and that pollution was indeed not beneficial in the longterm to the environment.
The article contains seven paragraphs. The author clarified his misleading statements in the last line of the sixth paragraph.
It should also be noted that the good people at Fox did not provide any documentation to verify their claims, or any information on how to find the study they cited.