In this article, former a MD democrat legislator documents how the EPA issued a report that merely said that chemicals found in fracking solutions were also found in a local water supply. It took the media only 3 weeks to totally misrepresent that as " The EPA concluded that fracking caused water pollution"

Read the complete article, complete with sources, and then tell me that the media does not have a bias, or an agenda.

Gazette.Net: Blair Lee: Gross media misconduct

__________________
1982 300SD " Wotan" ..On the road as of Jan 8, 2007 with Historic Tags

Sounds more like poor journalism and a result of sensationalism rather than "media bias".

__________________
TC
Current stable:
- 2004 Mazda RALLYWANKEL
- 2007 Saturn sky redline
- 2004 Explorer...under surgery.

Past: 135i, GTI, 300E, 300SD, 300SD, Stealth

Media bias? Oh no! Surely not!

__________________
2001 SLK 320 six speed manual
2014 Porsche Cayenne six speed manual

Annoy a Liberal, Read the Constitution

I don't believe you're more upset about so-called media bias than the discovery of fracking juice in the drinking water.
I guess you and I have a different sense of values.
If the chemicals were fracking compounds, how did they get into the water if not from fracking operations?
To me the article is more about defending fracking than media bias.
But fracking and media bias are 2 Republican bimbo buzz words, making the connection hardly avoidable.

Ah the good ol jerky knee strikes again

__________________
TC
Current stable:
- 2004 Mazda RALLYWANKEL
- 2007 Saturn sky redline
- 2004 Explorer...under surgery.

Past: 135i, GTI, 300E, 300SD, 300SD, Stealth

In reviewing some of the related stories that were published in early December, the coverage seemed pretty balanced in many outlets.

The commentary in the link the OP gave first states that the EPA draft was release on December 28, which must be a typo since he goes on to criticizes a December 21st Washington Times article, so clearly the Times did not have the draft a week before the release.

Washington Times December 21 article

However, if you look at the reports on December 8th and thereafter about the EPA's Pavillion WY findings:

USA Today December 8 Report

CBS News December 8 Report

The "media" reports appear to report both sides, with the EPA cautions and limitations.

BTW, did anyone notice the news story about fracking being the cause of earthquakes in areas like Ohio and Colorado?

Have you even studied what the slurry is?

__________________
1987 560SL
85,000 miles

Have you?
It ain't milk and cookies, it's a pollutant.
I live just south of an area were fracking is proposed and I get my water from a well on my property.
Anyone thinking that fracking juice can't get into our water supply, or isn't a pollutant is effing ignorant.

In other fracking news, earthquakes in Ohio have been atrributed to fracking operations.
Confirmed: Fracking caused Ohio earthquakes — RT

May I ask if you did what you requested others to do?

NPR website December 8 article

MSNBC December 8 article

Unless you know for a fact that the unused fracking fluid is in fact a pollutant, then you are guilty of spewing suspicions.

Now, the used juice has benzines in it from the rocks it is used in...that is known.

As for the earthquakes, any geologist could have told you that it was a possibility.

__________________
1987 560SL
85,000 miles

Splitting hairs, aren't we? Fresh, unused fluid isn't what's being discussed, either by the EPA draft or the participants on this thread; that's exclusively your claim to fame.

It's the end product that this thread involves, the stuff that needs to be recovered and stored so that it does not cause contamination.

Media bias? You're joking, right?

NPR? MSNBC? Now THERE are some news sources with no bias!

__________________
2001 SLK 320 six speed manual
2014 Porsche Cayenne six speed manual

Annoy a Liberal, Read the Constitution

Larry, that's why I included them, so take a dose of anti-nausea medication and have a look at the articles.

They are all basically the same, quoting the EPA draft and the response from the company representative. The news stories also contain the stated limitations of the EPA finding.

How else would a news agency cover this story?

MS Fowler challenged us to read the sources and reach some conclusion. What I can conclude is that he did not do what he asked of us; that the commentator column in the link is somewhat biased about the media and this is likely not even a moderate case or example of media bias.

The stretch of the original article to the tea party and ows in relation to the nutjobs shooting up places is off too. I could be wrong on this as I'm on my phone - but th giffords shooting was done by a kook loosely associated with the tea party whereas theguy who shot at the white house wasnt affiliated with anything...hence the lack of reporting. The original article is all over the place grasping for arguments, going from fracking to ows to assassination attempts within a few paragraphs is...poor.

__________________
TC
Current stable:
- 2004 Mazda RALLYWANKEL
- 2007 Saturn sky redline
- 2004 Explorer...under surgery.

Past: 135i, GTI, 300E, 300SD, 300SD, Stealth