There is perhaps no better example of how disingenuous and inconsistent our corporate press is than the comparison between The New York Times’ take on gas stoves vs. the fiery derailment of a train carrying toxic chemicals along the Ohio-Pennsylvania line in East Palestine, Ohio, last week. According to the press, gas stoves are deeply worrisome and hazardous, but a chemical spill equivalent to a World War I-era bioweapon is perfectly safe.
“Gas stoves have ignited a debate in Washington, as mounting evidence shows potential health risks including a link to childhood asthma,” reads The New York Times in an article from last month. The column was one of many the corporate press published at the behest of Democrats to fan the flames of hysteria surrounding gas stoves.
Richard Trumka Jr. of the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission began pushing to ban gas stoves back in December, calling it “a real possibility” that could happen quickly with enough public pressure. Shortly after, there was an outpouring of studies on the “science” of why gas stoves are hazardous, and Democrat lawmakers began throwing out every talking point from “gas stoves cause brain damage” to “gas stoves are racist.”
The gas stove panic has nothing to do with science. It’s wrapped up in a massive tyrannical power grab cloaked in environmentalism, and those who want your gas stove won’t stop there; they want to ban all gas-powered appliances.
The media never considered there were any negatives to a gas stove ban, though. Instead, they gleefully defended Trumka’s proposal and worked to convince the public that their gas stoves are an environmental and health liability. Then, shortly after, the media reversed course, assuring people there would be no ban, and the whole thing was a “right-wing culture war” topic once the White House backed away from the proposal.
Naturally, when duty called for the media to downplay an actual health crisis — the chemical spill in Ohio — they obliged. After the freight train spilled a slew of toxic chemicals, the EPA evacuated East Palestine and burned the spill, causing a mushroom cloud of hazardous chemicals to plume over the area.
Two days after the burn, the EPA told citizens it was safe for them to come home, breathe the air, and drink the water. But since residents have gone home, they have reported experiencing headaches and irritated eyes and finding countless fish, pets, and wildlife dead or dying.
It’s fair to say that the whole situation was handled disastrously and likely because the climate fanatics working at EPA don’t really care about the environment. All their time and money goes to “climate change,” which translates to gas stove bans and thermostats regulated by the government. Indeed, climate change hysterics are useful for making money and centralizing state power. A chemical spill impacting the natural environment and health of people living in a little village in fly-over America is not.
“I’m asking they trust the government,” said EPA’s administrator, Michael Regan. “Trust the government” also happens to be the exact message from The New York Times. “After a train carrying toxic material derailed in Ohio this month,” reads a New York Times article published yesterday, “right wing commentators have been particularly critical of the response using the crisis to sow distrust about government agencies and suggests the damage could be yours irreparable.”
No. The distrust does not come from “right wing commentators” it comes from the people who live in East Palestine — the people reporting the effects of living in poison at the recommendation of the EPA.
The article, titled “‘Chernobyl 2.0’? Ohio Train Derailment Spurs Wild Speculation,” also claims that those who say the “vital water reservoirs serving states downriver could be badly contaminated” are doing so “without evidence.”
Again, the “evidence” that the water in and near East Palestine could affect the water in surrounding states are first-hand reports, one of which comes from Republican Ohio Sen. JD Vance. Vance traveled to East Palestine, where he recorded a video near a creek showing dead fish and worms, and even chemicals coming out of the ground from the bottom of the creek bed.
In the video, Vance also challenged Regan to drink the water in East Palestine if it’s supposedly safe to drink. Unsurprisingly, Regan has not taken Vance up on the offer. The same offer should be made to the members of the corporate press, who are parroting the talking points of the EPA.
Just like Regan, I doubt anyone in the corporate media would dare drink the water in East Palestine. The media’s reporting on public health, as with everything else, is selective and meticulously adherent to whatever talking points are most advantageous to its ideological allies. The press’s demonization of stoves and ambivalence toward toxic chemical spills is further affirmation that the corporate media is deserving only of our distrust and contempt.