Taking A Short View on How Spin Works To Mislead People
How A NJ Environmental Source Supported a Story Praising Gov. Christie on Climate Change
Today, Scott Gurian at NJ Spotlight profiles John Miller, cofounder and legislative committee chair for the New Jersey Association for Floodplain Management (NJAFM). (see:
I have praised Miller for speaking out regarding the science:
Ken Miller was very blunt, and repeatedly called out the Gov. for false statements. Prof. Psuty was very clear and comfortable in talking about the implications of his science, and had the best quote in the AC press story:
“I’m afraid when I hear our local politicians talk about the dunes, they think the dunes solve everything and that is just not the case.”
I also praised Miller for his clear communication on risks and his criticism of NJ’s policy response to Sandy, e.g. see:
- Ocean County Hazard Mitigation Plan Shows Major Portions Of County Underwater Due to Sea Level Rise:
It is estimated sea levels will rise between 2.5 and 6 feet by the end of the century. If those forecasts prove accurate, New Jersey’s effort to require those rebuilding to elevate at least one foot above the current base flood mark is not enough, said Ken Miller, a geologist and sea level rise expert.
“If New Jersey wants to be moving forward to incorporate sea level rise, there needs to be a minimum of two feet above base flood elevation in the current maps,” he said.
Sea level rise was responsible for an additional 38,000 homes to flood during Sandy, Miller said.
But, moving beyond Mr. Miller, the NJ Spotlight profile provides an opportunity for me to engage in a little inside baseball and followup on a recent post regarding a deeply troubling and highly misleading NY Daily News column. (see:
Remarkably, that column favorably compared NJ Gov. Christie to NY Gov. Cuomo on climate change policy.
That story not only praised Gov. Christie on climate change and his consideration of coastal development risks, but it stated that he listened to scientific experts and made decisions based on their recommendations, see:
I spent several hours trying to find out how NY Daily News columnist Juan Gonzalez could have made that mistake.
No NJ environmental reporter would ever have written that story, because they are aware of Gov. Christie’s horrible record on climate change and coastal development, if not fully aware of the Gov.’s veto of the Hudson River piers bill.
I called Gonzalez 3 times and left detailed messages on his tape. He did not return the calls.
I called Mr. Miller and left a detailed message on his tape. Miller did not return my call.
But, I got emails from friends and spoke to knowledgeable and involved sources in NY.
Readers will be surprised – and might find it difficult to believe – what I found out.
According to my sources, the embarrassingly wrong Gonzalez story was teed up by former Gov. Corzine aid and current NJ environmentalist Deb Mans, head of NY/NJ Baykeeper.
I was told that Mans gave Ganzalez the Christie veto message and a letter from NJ Floodplain Assc. requesting a veto. Obviously, providing that information implies that the Gov. based his veto on the NJ Flood Plain Assc. request.
Mans confirmed that in a Nov. 15 email, where she takes credit for the Gonzalez story:
From: Debbie Mans [mailto:debbie@nynjbaykeeper.org]
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 4:14 PM
To: RiverCAC@aol.com
Cc: jeff.tittel@verizon.net; Tim Dillingham; Cindy Zipf (Clean Ocean Action); Suzanne y. Mattei; epica@foe.org; Paul Gallay;Roger.Downs@sierraclub.org; dalal.aboulhosn@sierraclub.org
Subject: Re: questions
Hi MarcyFYI — we worked with Juan on this column.� Debbie
But Mans subsequently backed off that when I confronted and criticizer her for doing that. Mans claimed that she only provided the Gov. veto message and that any mistakes made by Gonzalez in interpreting it were his own.
Pushing back on what I perceived as a lie, on Nov. 19, I wrote to Mans:
Deb – further conversations about the Gonzalez column from those directly involved suggests that you did not give me the full story and in fact, you gave me a misleading half truth.
Specifically, I was told that you gave Gonzalez the Flood plan managers assc. letter requesting a veto AND the veto statement.
You did not reveal the former in your prior note to me.
Obviously, providing both those pieces of info strongly suggests a connection, which Gonzalez made in saying Christie listened to professionals.
So, you spun the narrative.
Deb denied that – An hour later, she wrote me this email response:
Bill
I have also heard from people who spoke to you directly and confirmed what I originally emailed you. You have been told both by me and an independent source that what you wrote below is false. I would imagine that knowingly publishing something that you know is false is indeed a serious matter. Debbie
So, there it is – a he said she said pathetic little story – but a huge mistake nonetheless.
Postscript
In a continuing effort to get to the bottom of this, here are some questions I just posed to Mr. Miller as comments on the NJ Spotlight profile:
- Would Mr. Miller like to comment on Gov. Christie’s recent veto of a bill that would have allowed development on piers in the Hudson River?A NY Daily News columnist recently used that veto – and Mr. Miller’s letter to the Gov. urging a veto – to suggest that Gov. Christie is more concerned about climate change risks than NY Gov. Cuomo.However, as Mr. Miller knows, the Gov. veto was NOT based on flood hazard risk to NEW development, but rather federal Flood Insurance Program regulatory requirements to maintain eligibility for EXISTING development.Would Mr. Miller care to correct the public record on that? The NY columnist got punked by CHristie, in much the same way that the NJ Dreamers did.For details and the NY Daily News column, see:When A Good Reporter Makes A Big Mistake On An Important Storyhttp://www.wolfenotes.com/2013/11/when-a-good-reporter-makes-a-big-mistake-on-an-important-story/
- Posted by njpeer1 on November 27 at 12:10 PM
- Would Mr. Miller care to comment on the new HUD regulations for NJ’s $1.4 billion second round funding, specifically, on how they conflict with current Christie Administration policy and practice? And how those conflicts are likely to be resolved?For details on that, see: CHRISTIE CLIMATE DENIAL IMPERILS SANDY RECOVERY FUNDS
http://www.wolfenotes.com/2013/11/christie-climate-denial-imperils-sandy-recovery-funds/ - Posted by njpeer1 on November 27 at 12:13 PM
- Would Mr. Miller care to comment on why he has not returned my calls in reference to the Christie veto?Would Mr. Miller care to explain how his letter to the Gov. requesting a veto was provided to the NY Daily News columnist and how that columnist misconstrued the veto and its relationship to Mr. Miller’s letter?These are the kind of questions journalists should ask sources.