Imagine a news story that went in detail about levels of radioactivity suddenly showing up in produce in certain areas of Japan, and also affecting the waters. The story mentions a number of Japanese people hospitalized with severe radiation poisoning. Add a paragraph about radioactive fallout being detected in California.
Now, imagine that this story neglects to even mention the Fukushima reactors or the earthquake and tsunami.
Such a story would be absurd, and would immediately make an editor rush to correct it.
And yet, on Page A-1 of the San Francisco Chronicle you have Pot wars: Private land new frontier in California written by Robert Townsend of California Watch – an investigative reporting organization that claims to provide “bold, new journalism.”
It’s a detailed story about how marijuana grows are showing up on private land in California, complete with booby traps, environmental damage, and retribution when owners try to eradicate.
Good investigation, but not once in the story do they mention the equivalent of the Fukushima reactors (the illegal status of marijuana) or the earthquake and tsunami (supply-side prohibition efforts).
The commenters caught it immediately. Why can’t Robert Townsend, the bold investigative reporting of California Watch, or the San Francisco Chronicle see the nuclear reactor in the room?