A couple weeks ago, an NPR producer started contacting opponents to the Grain Belt Express, trying to find someone in Kansas to interview for what was dubbed a story about wind energy in Kansas. Enthusiasm = zero. Nobody wanted to waste the time on an NPR story that probably contained bias before it was even recorded. In addition, it set off my radar that NPR seemed to be looking for a NIMBY to round out its story. NPR wasn't really interested in GBE, per se, but in opposition to it.
After really stretching to consider "someone who happens to be right on the Kansas/Missouri border," the reporter got hooked up with experienced Block GBE spokeswoman Jennifer Gatrel and visited the ranch she owns with her husband, Jeff, 45 minutes outside Kansas City, Missouri.
And yesterday, this aired.
(Funny, Jennifer seems to also be starring in today's story about rural "brain gain," which was a surprise to Jennifer.)
Jennifer and Jeff spent 2 hours with the reporter at their ranch, which resulted in roughly a 3.5 minute segment in the hour-long story. The reporter seemed charmed by the bucolic setting and thrilled with the animals, but uninterested in the actual GBE project, except in how it would have personally affected the Gatrels, both by destroying their land and future. The Gatrels did a fantastic job trying to stay on their talking points. This isn't their first rodeo, they did the same when the New York Times came to interview them several years ago. But at least the NYT was actually interested in the project itself. NPR simply glossed over all the issues with GBE, such as the fact that the project doesn't have enough customers to make it financially feasible, the fact that the project lacks a permit to cross the state of Illinois and has not applied for one, and that it still faces a brick wall in Missouri, with an ongoing legal appeal to the permit and a requirement to get the assent of each county it crosses. GBE is barely treading water. Seems like Invenergy doesn't want to waste any money on it at the moment, possibly related to its lack of customers who would finance the project.
So, how did NPR fill the rest of their hour-long show? They interviewed three guys in Kansas, but that didn't last much longer than the Gatrel's segment. Interesting that the fellas profiting from Kansas wind turbines state that they would never want to have a transmission line across their own properties, due to its "like eminent domain" nature. If hosting turbines is voluntary, why is a transmission line to enable the turbine involuntary? Of course, NPR didn't bother to explain. It was all about fluff and glitter, not substance. The story was cleverly designed to appeal to emotion, not logic.
The bulk of the hour was taken up by the pro-wind opinions of Russell Gold, who wrote a fantasy book about Clean Line Energy Partners, and Amy Farrell of big wind trade group American Wind Energy Association. Our friend Russell kept referencing concern about the Gatrels personally, while stabbing them in the back with statements about how somebody has to sacrifice for energy. And he was quick to get the word "NIMBY" in at the end of the show for good measure.
Except nobody has to sacrifice at all! A truly sympathetic transmission line developer could bury new transmission on existing rights of way, such as alongside rail or highways. But NPR isn't interested in that. It was too busy trying to convince its listeners that big wind is somehow "necessary." Preaching to the choir, boys and girls! NPR listeners don't need to be convinced. They already believe or they wouldn't be listening. NPR convinced nobody with that story. It wasn't true journalism, it was story-telling designed to give an audience what it wanted to hear. Listen, my children and you shall hear... the biased opinions that you hold dear.
Jennifer and Jeff Gatrel will continue to fight on, even though their ranch is no longer affected. And so will thousands of others. Victory is within their grasp, happening in venues ignored by NPR.
After really stretching to consider "someone who happens to be right on the Kansas/Missouri border," the reporter got hooked up with experienced Block GBE spokeswoman Jennifer Gatrel and visited the ranch she owns with her husband, Jeff, 45 minutes outside Kansas City, Missouri.
And yesterday, this aired.
(Funny, Jennifer seems to also be starring in today's story about rural "brain gain," which was a surprise to Jennifer.)
Jennifer and Jeff spent 2 hours with the reporter at their ranch, which resulted in roughly a 3.5 minute segment in the hour-long story. The reporter seemed charmed by the bucolic setting and thrilled with the animals, but uninterested in the actual GBE project, except in how it would have personally affected the Gatrels, both by destroying their land and future. The Gatrels did a fantastic job trying to stay on their talking points. This isn't their first rodeo, they did the same when the New York Times came to interview them several years ago. But at least the NYT was actually interested in the project itself. NPR simply glossed over all the issues with GBE, such as the fact that the project doesn't have enough customers to make it financially feasible, the fact that the project lacks a permit to cross the state of Illinois and has not applied for one, and that it still faces a brick wall in Missouri, with an ongoing legal appeal to the permit and a requirement to get the assent of each county it crosses. GBE is barely treading water. Seems like Invenergy doesn't want to waste any money on it at the moment, possibly related to its lack of customers who would finance the project.
So, how did NPR fill the rest of their hour-long show? They interviewed three guys in Kansas, but that didn't last much longer than the Gatrel's segment. Interesting that the fellas profiting from Kansas wind turbines state that they would never want to have a transmission line across their own properties, due to its "like eminent domain" nature. If hosting turbines is voluntary, why is a transmission line to enable the turbine involuntary? Of course, NPR didn't bother to explain. It was all about fluff and glitter, not substance. The story was cleverly designed to appeal to emotion, not logic.
The bulk of the hour was taken up by the pro-wind opinions of Russell Gold, who wrote a fantasy book about Clean Line Energy Partners, and Amy Farrell of big wind trade group American Wind Energy Association. Our friend Russell kept referencing concern about the Gatrels personally, while stabbing them in the back with statements about how somebody has to sacrifice for energy. And he was quick to get the word "NIMBY" in at the end of the show for good measure.
Except nobody has to sacrifice at all! A truly sympathetic transmission line developer could bury new transmission on existing rights of way, such as alongside rail or highways. But NPR isn't interested in that. It was too busy trying to convince its listeners that big wind is somehow "necessary." Preaching to the choir, boys and girls! NPR listeners don't need to be convinced. They already believe or they wouldn't be listening. NPR convinced nobody with that story. It wasn't true journalism, it was story-telling designed to give an audience what it wanted to hear. Listen, my children and you shall hear... the biased opinions that you hold dear.
Jennifer and Jeff Gatrel will continue to fight on, even though their ranch is no longer affected. And so will thousands of others. Victory is within their grasp, happening in venues ignored by NPR.
RSS Feed