Comparing UT Report & NYT Article On PA Gas Oversight

The New York Times February 27th, 2011 article created a false narrative that Pennsylvania was an "extreme case" of "lax regulation" and "lax oversight" where "gas producers are generally left to police themselves," with the result that its rivers that supplied drinking waters were being heavily polluted by radiation pollution that threatened human health.

Massive testing of drinking water at the tap and in stream totally debunk the main radiation narrative of the New York Times article, with one example being the Pittsburgh Water and Sewer Authority that is still doing monthly test and posting the results on its website www.pgh2o.com.  Pennsylvania American Water Company also tested drinking water at 5 of its treatment plants.  Fourteen other drinking water suppliers did the same. All tests prove the drinking water drawn from rivers and streams for public water systems has radiation at natural or background levels, is safe to drink, and has not been at risk.

Of course, the NYT has refused to inform accurately or fully its readers about the results of these tests, since they destroy the article's fundamental narrative.

The paper can be counted on to also not report that the University of Texas, after reviewing enforcement of oil and gas laws in 15 states, concluded that Pennsylvania had issued the largest number of violations of any state.  See www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=4664957094233317169#editor/target=post;postID=1360814019445320030

Pennsylvania issued 1200 violations to the industry in 2010 and 1100 in 2011. When it completes its work, UT may document that Pennsylvania issued approximately two times the number of violations compared to the second ranking state and that the number of violations issued in Pennsylvania was typically 5 to 10 times greater than in most other states.  Still other reporting found that Pennsylvania leads the nation in imposing fines and sanctions for violations of oil and gas laws.

Don't expect to see any of those facts in the NYT, because they destroy the other major narrative of the article that Pennsylvania was an extreme case of lax oversight and lax regulation. The Public Editor of the New York Times that has twice spanked the gas reporter and editors that have fed cleverly constructed misleading and false accounts on the papers' readers should consider a third public spanking.