In its continuing quest to pretend that climate change does not actually exist, the "paper of record", having gone paperless, is now edging toward recordless. Or make that reckless.
If you've been sleeping for the past few weeks, here's the rundown:
* On January 11, the New York Times announced that it would shut down its environmental desk and re-assign its editors and reporters. At the time, managing news editor Dean Baquet claimed that the change was "purely a structural matter" and that "We have not lost any desire for environmental coverage."
And to prove their continued zeal for the environment:
* On March 1, the Times announced that it was shutting down its Green Blog, its only blog specifically devoted to environmental and energy issues. As Slate has wryly noted, sixty-five other blogs remain on the Times website, so that the public can still remain up-to-date on what's really important in the world, like awards shows, horseracing, golf, and the Times crossword puzzle.
* On February 27, the Times reported a story on the drought in Texas that resulted in the shuttering of a beef-processing plant in Plainview due to lack of cattle. They did a rundown on the economic impacts to Plainview, which are severe, but out of 1200 words in the article, not one of them was "climate". The drought in Texas is now entering its third year, and one would think the Times would have a handle on it by now. How many more years will it have to last before the Times acknowledges that the climate of Texas is changing? And that Texans (and the rest of us) are responsible for that?
Well I suppose we should forgive the reporter of that story, Manny Fernandez, because he's not on the environmental beat. Oh wait! NOBODY is on the environmental beat any more at the "paperless of reckless."
So maybe the climate will stop changing now?