Richard Gralnik on fri 5 jun 98
There was an item on the news last night that concerns me.
There is now a web site where you can go to find all the polluters
in your neighborhood. You enter your zipcode and it gives you
a map of every known polluter in the area. These "polluters"
apparently are nothing more than local businesses - small or
large manufacturers or any other site that for whatever reason
generates industrial waste. The site even provides a complaint
form letter where you can fill in the blanks and shoot a copy off
to anyone with an email address (e.g. president@whitehouse.gov).
And, interestingly enough, this service is provided free. Well,
someone is paying for it. I would be curious to know who.
What bothers me about this is that, as the newscaster said several
times in a very subtle bit of CYA don't-sue-us-we-issued-a-disclaimer
statement "most of these businesses are operating at levels well
below federal limits" (or words to that effect). If so,
then why the hell do you list them as "polluters" with all the
attendant negative connotations and provide a convenient way
for anyone to issue a formal complaint against someone who
may be doing absolutely nothing wrong.
How long before everyone with a reduction firing gas kiln finds
their house on that map? Then anyone with a car that didn't
pass the smog test on the first try? Do you flush your toilet?
On the map you go.
Does anyone else smell creeping McCarthyism, Brave New Worlds,
turn-in-your-neighbors-keep-looking-over-your-shoulder mentalities?
To me, there is something really wrong with this. (On a par with
President Clinton telling a bunch of school kids they should write
their Congressman and tell him/her to pass a law making smoking
illegal in the United States? Can you say "Prohibition" kids? I
knew you could.)
Richard
Corey Hale on sat 6 jun 98
Richard,
One of the biggest problems with the "don't sue us we've issued a disclaimer"
is that once these companies or corporations have self exposed themselves, the
public is no longer able to sue them for damages. I'm not sure McCarthyism
has much to do with this, for all it really is, is a way for corporations to
destroy the environment and not have to pay for it. We as potters can look at
this two ways, one, if we tell someone we've polluted then they can't slap us
with a lawsuit when their cat dies of lead poisoning, or two, we can take the
humanist approach, and say wow, we have a responsibility towards our
environment, after all, its viability sustains ours.
I believe a witch hunt involves the victimization of innocent people, I don't
believe the pollution of our surroundings is ever an innocent act.
peace,
Corey
Dave Eitel on sat 6 jun 98
So, Whats the address of this page...so we can see whether we're on it.
Dave Eitel
Cedar Creek Pottery
Cedarburg, WI USA
http://www.cedarcreekpottery.com
Richard Gralnik on mon 8 jun 98
Sorry I left that off. The url is http://www.scorecard.org
Richard
At 10:14 AM 6/6/98 EDT, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>So, Whats the address of this page...so we can see whether we're on it.
>
>Dave Eitel
>Cedar Creek Pottery
>Cedarburg, WI USA
>http://www.cedarcreekpottery.com
>
>
Gil FREEDMAN on mon 8 jun 98
Mr. G: I agree the web site manager must be responsible - and we the
browsers have got to take such claims with a grain of salt - it's not an
official claim but the opinion of an individual, and only that. It's more
important that everyone has the right to speak out, or list in this case,
than not. A sophisticated browser would look for a signature of the author
and contact info., and citations and references. They would place weight on
their claims based on those, after running down and verifying the sources.
Just like we'd do with printed material.
Probably they'd be fairer if they'd relable the site "Toxic Emission
Sources In Your Neighborhood" or similar, rather than "polluters". But
that's an issue for the reader to decide.
One of the problems with government is an inability (due to cost or
other factors) or unwillingness to get information out to the public,
information that the public has every right to know. If an individual has
made the effort to dig out and publish such info., great. Examples would be
voting records of public officials - and polluters who've been fined, and
what for. I think the public even has a right to know who's emitting what
into the environment, too. The Internet is going to be a great boon in
that direction.
Hey - maybe we've got to quantify the collective impact of at what our
individual contributions are to environmental pollution, and what can be
done about it, if significant.
Gil Freedman, spouse of Laura, Clayart member.
______________________________________________________________________
Richard Gralnik wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> There was an item on the news last night that concerns me.
>
> There is now a web site where you can go to find all the polluters
> in your neighborhood. You enter your zipcode and it gives you
> a map of every known polluter in the area. These "polluters"
> apparently are nothing more than local businesses - small or
> large manufacturers or any other site that for whatever reason
> generates industrial waste. The site even provides a complaint
> form letter where you can fill in the blanks and shoot a copy off
> to anyone with an email address (e.g. president@whitehouse.gov).
>
> And, interestingly enough, this service is provided free. Well,
> someone is paying for it. I would be curious to know who.
>
> What bothers me about this is that, as the newscaster said several
> times in a very subtle bit of CYA don't-sue-us-we-issued-a-disclaimer
> statement "most of these businesses are operating at levels well
> below federal limits" (or words to that effect). If so,
>
> then why the hell do you list them as "polluters" with all the
> attendant negative connotations and provide a convenient way
> for anyone to issue a formal complaint against someone who
> may be doing absolutely nothing wrong.
>
> How long before everyone with a reduction firing gas kiln finds
> their house on that map? Then anyone with a car that didn't
> pass the smog test on the first try? Do you flush your toilet?
> On the map you go.
>
> Does anyone else smell creeping McCarthyism, Brave New Worlds,
> turn-in-your-neighbors-keep-looking-over-your-shoulder mentalities?
> To me, there is something really wrong with this. (On a par with
> President Clinton telling a bunch of school kids they should write
> their Congressman and tell him/her to pass a law making smoking
> illegal in the United States? Can you say "Prohibition" kids? I
> knew you could.)
>
> Richard
Riff Fenton on fri 12 jun 98
Let's stop the distortion, misrepresention and untruths about the
current president on CLAYART. It has as little place here as any
where else. I don't need to be subjected to your negative political
ignorance. I get enough of that just about everywhere else. To use
CLAYART to spread your spite against the president is uncalled for.
The president never urged any children to write their congressmen to
make tobacco illegal.
| |
|
