One could lament the fact that the burden of proof is greater on the injured, and thus they must be ever more careful in their assertions, or just proceed accordingly. When the anti-fracking magazine The Flowback contacted us, wanting pictures to illustrate its well-founded arguments against hydro-fracking, we should have refused them the use of a particularly conspicuous mountain-top removal image. They argued for including it as a perfect example of the impact of mankind on the landscape, but it left the publication an easy target for the well-funded pro-fracking lobby. It was surprising, though, how long it took them to pounce.
The (obviously pro-fracking) NY Post took it upon itself to try to blow this into a bigger deal than it was, and in so doing took a much bigger pie in the face. To illustrate their side and their interview of me, they printed a hydro-fracking image, identified loudly as my MTR image, stretched what I said to the breaking point, and impugned the believability of anyone that claims to communicate with animals.
It's sad that anyone who proclaims the dangers of hydro-fracking must carefully back up every fact while the proponents can play fast and loose, but that is the reality. It's a greater shame that our mass media is dominated by mouthpieces of the hydrocarbon industry, but somehow we allow it and continue to support them.