1998 February 23
Esther Enkin
Managing Editor and Chief Journalist
Information Programming
CBC Radio
Dear Ms. Enkin,
Thank you for your reply (1998 February 10) to my comments about the
IDEAS series on nuclear power. I have received a detailed response from
Mr. Allen as well, and will be responding to him shortly.
I am glad to see that the conflict-of-interest issue pertaining to Mr.
Allen has been addressed. I should point out that this wouldn't have
been an issue at all if the nature of Mr. Allen's CBC production were
more objective; I therefore feel this is more a question of responsible
journalism. However, the measures you have informed me of seem adequate
to address the current problem; I will wait until I have thoroughly read
Mr. Allen's response to see if the matter as a whole can be closed.
In the meantime, I wish to respond to one comment in your letter; namely:
"Energy Probe is not simply, as you [I] characterize it, an anti-nuclear
group, but a public policy group that deals with the energy sector." I
appreciate that Energy Probe involves itself with non-nuclear policy
issues; however, I believe my characterization of the group (and here it
is important to distinguish between Energy Probe, which we are talking
about, and its parent organisation, the Energy Probe Research Foundation)
as Canada's "most vocal" and "well-known" anti-nuclear group, is without
question. Energy Probe's own literature emphasizes the influence it has
had on energy policy, and the media exposure it has enjoyed over the
years - while listing examples of articles and appearances that are
almost 100% anti-nuclear in nature. Regardless of other activities, and
regardless of how it may wish to portray itself in various forums, Energy
Probe is a very active, and effective, Canadian anti-nuclear group.
Moreover, it is precisely this biased mandate, combined with the
self-indulgent pairing of influence on public opinion and dependence on
public opinion for funding, that I feel removes its right to be thought
of as an objective "think tank" in this area. Such was the
characterization accorded it by the IDEAS show, and hence the need - if
only in the name of good journalism - to give equal time to the
industry's point of view.
Sincerely,
Jeremy Whitlock
|
