In the Media

No News Is Bad News for the Pegasus Pipeline Spill

Why have major U.S. newspapers given minimal coverage to the Pegasus oil pipeline spills?



You would reasonably expect a major effort by the country’s leading newspapers to uncover the reasons for the oil spills along the Pegasus pipeline in Arkansas and Missouri, as well as to environmental consequences, including the legalities of cleanup.

But after publishing an article or two, the United States’ leading newspapers have largely given up on the story. (Read John Mathews’ article The Pegasus Oil Rupture and the Myth of American “Energy Independence” on The Globalist.)

As of May 8, the New York Times has published just two articles about the Pegasus leaks — one on March 30, which reported the first spill in Arkansas, and one a day later that discussed the relevance of the rupture and spill to the debate over Keystone.

Nothing further for the past month and more.

The Washington Post ran three articles and an editorial, on April 1, April 2, April 3 and April 5 — then silence for the next month.

The next mention came on May 3, when the paper ran an Associated Press story that minimized the consequences (“ExxonMobil says cleanup nearly complete after small oil pipeline leak in southeast Missouri.”)

The Wall Street Journal did not even report the story. Instead, it began its coverage with a contentious editorial, “A Tale of two oil spills: Greens fret over pipeline leaks but are mute over train derailments,” on April 1.

The next day the paper ran a story in which it reported that Arkansas’ water utility planned to ask Exxon move portions of the pipeline to ensure water safety following the spill.

Since then … nothing.

This list was compiled by John Mathews. You can read his article, The Pegasus Oil Rupture and the Myth of American “Energy Independence,” on The Globalist.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Responses to “No News Is Bad News for the Pegasus Pipeline Spill”

If you would like to comment, please visit our Facebook page.