Environmental News Analysis Assignment

Hi there! The article I am analyzing is from CNN.com titled Toxic towns: People of Mossville 'are like an experiment' and dated February 26, 2010. To view the article, click on its link which is under the News Analysis list to the left of this blog. There is a video and some pictures too, so feel free to check it out!

Anaylsis:

The CNN.com news article titled “Toxic Towns: People of Mossville ‘are like an experiment,’” talks about residents from Mossville, Louisiana. Majority of the residents in this town are African-American and have seen an increase in cancer within their town; they believe it is due to the 14 chemical plants nearby. The residents have complained for many years about their health problems to the industry, and to state and federal agencies, but have seen no improvement. Now that they have an EPA administrator to represent them, they have high hopes of becoming a Superfund site, so that they can all live a healthier life.

The title of this article uses really controversial words to catch attention. The very first word “toxic” automatically stands out to the audience, because it brings up images associated with: danger, death, poison, and many more harmful things. The thought of people being an experiment is also headlined. Humans are not used to being scientifically experimented on with toxins, usually animals are. This comes across as inhumane. The quote “People of Mossville ‘are like an experiment,’” was quoted from Wilma Subra, a chemist. Subra does not provide any information as to how the residents are like experiments; it is more of an opinion. Because of this, the title does not portray the issue of the article very well; I suggest this title to be changed to “Mossville fighting to be a Superfund region.”

The author separated this article into three sections: health problems that are associated with Mossville residents, the power plant boom, and Mossville fears. They introduced the conflict first, then gave a little history, and concluded the article with no solution. This article is trying to persuade people into believing that the power plants are affecting the health of residents in Mossville and that this community needs to be turned into a Super Region.

The length of the article is quite long; it is about 2 pages back and front when printed. There are three pictures of local residents with their quotes and a video that is three minutes long. The pictures of the residents are not graphic in any way, but it helps the audience to associate an image with the conflict which makes the problem more realistic and relatable. The video does contain some good footage. The news reporter interviews some “experts,” local residents, and shows pictures of the chemical plants. There was a brief interview with the opposing side which lasted about 3 seconds. There were a total of 8 sources used in this article; 3 were local residents, 1 was the EPA, 1 was Robert Bullard (author of Dumping in Dixie and director of the Environmental Justice Resource Center), 1 was the Toxic Substances & Disease Registry, 1 was Larry DeRoussel (executive director of Lake Area Industry Alliance), and 1 was Wilma Subra (chemist from Iberia, Lousisiana). The author of this article did try to get more of the companies to speak on camera, but they didn't want to, so therefore, there was only one source from the opposing side. The video also didn’t contain all the sources that were listed in the article and even had some sources that weren’t listed in the article.

This article is based on emotional appeal. The video gave the residents the most time to voice their opinions so that the audience could hear mostly the negative impacts. The very end of this article even ends with Dorothy Felix, one of the residents of Mossville saying, "This is the first time I've had a little hope in EPA." The audience automatically sympathizes with these residents because everyone has known someone who has died from cancer and therefore can relate to this situation. With so many deaths and more cancer, the articles then talks about how no industries have tried to help or listen to these residents. Lisa Jackson, the first African-American administrator of the EPA is trying to help this community become a Superfund site. With her help, this community has a chance of federal funding for cleanup in Mossville. This community has "hope."

Overall, this article is in favor of the resident’s point of view. There are 8 sources in this news article and only one of them was from the opposing side. How can no one else from the opposing side want to comment and feel that DeRousseau's comments were enough, when DeRousseau's statement was only 3 seconds long on video and 2 sentences long on paper? Is that truly enough information to represent the opposing side's point of view? No, it is not. The video accompanying the article was 3 minutes and 7 seconds long, but only the opposing side held three seconds of the entire video. If the other companies were not willing to be put on camera, why not give DeRousseau more time to speak or explain himself? Perhaps this reporter could have done more research and try to prove what the experts were saying. For example, when Wilma Subra stated that the statistics were misleading because they covered a large area and Mossville was only a small area, the reporter should have researched that to see whether this was true or not. The many pictures of the local residents and the title of this article positively show that this article is biased. The main concern now for this community is to become a Superfund site. The investigation is still happening and we can only hope these residents get what they deserve.