3 ms·

I've seem that. Thats not news thats commentary, its a big distinction that not enough people are aware of. My sources are pretty broad. News is original repor

I've seem that. Thats not news thats commentary, its a big distinction that not enough people are aware of. My sources are pretty broad. News is original reporting and going to the primary sources of a given story. Commentary sources usually function as secondary or tertiary sources and typically lack the resources to hound government officials, wait outside their office, spend tons of time digging up FOIAs for issues that may or may not pan out, etc. Figuring out whats happening with a hazardous derailment is not the job of a Tucker or Watters, thats the job of an inquisitive on the ground journalist. Which every news agency employs but very selectively uses.

chucksta 4y ago
Couldn't have responded better for me
jakear 4y ago
So what are some actual questions you want answered? The one example you gave was: why haven't "they" even bothered asking FEMA for help. Who even is "they"? And how do you know FEMA hasn't been asked for help by "them"?
- corbulo 4y ago
  They being the local government. FEMA said on their own twitter. https://twitter.com/fema/status/1625617600104259584?s=20 https://twitter.com/fema/status/1625617600104259584?s=20 Why has FEMA not been contacted for assistance? What went into the decision to burn it off? What are the implications of that for local residents? How long are local residents going to live with this? What are we going to do to help the local ecology? What recourse is there for local residents who develop health issues from this? How long is this whole thing supposed to last in the water table? What are they gonna do to help prevent it? I could go on. Genuinely asking, could you not think of one of those? Aren't you curious about the decisions being made?
  - jakear 4y ago
    > Why has FEMA not been contacted for assistance? >> We are monitoring the incident and remain in close contact with local officials who are handling the response on the ground. Sounds good to me. Not every happening in the country needs a dedicated slush fund. If officials determine that this does, FEMA has already been in close contact with the people who they need to be in close contact with. You want to be the one who determines this? Run for office or apply for the job. > What went into the decision to burn it off? What are the implications of that for local residents? To prevent an explosion, as explained here: https://www.newsweek.com/did-control-burn-toxic-chemicals-make-ohio-train-derailment-worse-1781273 https://www.newsweek.com/did-control-burn-toxic-chemicals-ma... This was very easy to find on Bing. Did you do any research at all or just expect the media to spoon feed you answers? > How long are local residents going to live with this? Not something that can be answered by anything but waiting and seeing. > What are we going to do to help the local ecology? How long is this whole thing supposed to last in the water table? I don't expect this to be something that is known right now. But I can bet that scientists the country over are investigating. > What are they gonna do to help prevent it? Literally the main question in the media. Assigning blame to some party/policy/whatever, in order to adopt a change. Plenty more of Fox relaying EPA analysis and demanding action from government here: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ohio-republican-invites-buttigieg-east-palestine-town-hall-train-derailment-save-seat https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ohio-republican-invites-but...
    - corbulo 4y ago
      >Sounds good to me. Not every happening in the country needs a dedicated slush fund. If officials determine that this does, FEMA has already been in close contact with the people who they need to be in close contact with. You want to be the one who determines this? Run for office or apply for the job. You may be satisfied by tweets when it comes to government accountability but the point is not that they should have it's an explanation why not. > Did you do any research at all or just expect the media to spoon feed you answers? The sourcing in the article you provided is not the govt. It's random people from tiktok and a random expert (who didn't make the claim you're asserting). It appears you're the one not doing the research. Try reading before condescending. >Not something that can be answered by anything but waiting and seeing. absolutely false. The difference here is not one of opinion, it's how easily satisfied you are with the information that is already out there. FEMA tweets vaguely, a tiktoker explains hazmat science, and satisfies your every curiosity. I'm not so easily satiated for one of the largest eco disasters in recent memory at least.

chucksta 4y ago

Couldn't have responded better for me

jakear 4y ago

So what are some actual questions you want answered? The one example you gave was: why haven't "they" even bothered asking FEMA for help. Who even is "they"? And how do you know FEMA hasn't been asked for help by "them"?

corbulo 4y ago
They being the local government. FEMA said on their own twitter. https://twitter.com/fema/status/1625617600104259584?s=20 https://twitter.com/fema/status/1625617600104259584?s=20 Why has FEMA not been contacted for assistance? What went into the decision to burn it off? What are the implications of that for local residents? How long are local residents going to live with this? What are we going to do to help the local ecology? What recourse is there for local residents who develop health issues from this? How long is this whole thing supposed to last in the water table? What are they gonna do to help prevent it? I could go on. Genuinely asking, could you not think of one of those? Aren't you curious about the decisions being made?
- jakear 4y ago
  > Why has FEMA not been contacted for assistance? >> We are monitoring the incident and remain in close contact with local officials who are handling the response on the ground. Sounds good to me. Not every happening in the country needs a dedicated slush fund. If officials determine that this does, FEMA has already been in close contact with the people who they need to be in close contact with. You want to be the one who determines this? Run for office or apply for the job. > What went into the decision to burn it off? What are the implications of that for local residents? To prevent an explosion, as explained here: https://www.newsweek.com/did-control-burn-toxic-chemicals-make-ohio-train-derailment-worse-1781273 https://www.newsweek.com/did-control-burn-toxic-chemicals-ma... This was very easy to find on Bing. Did you do any research at all or just expect the media to spoon feed you answers? > How long are local residents going to live with this? Not something that can be answered by anything but waiting and seeing. > What are we going to do to help the local ecology? How long is this whole thing supposed to last in the water table? I don't expect this to be something that is known right now. But I can bet that scientists the country over are investigating. > What are they gonna do to help prevent it? Literally the main question in the media. Assigning blame to some party/policy/whatever, in order to adopt a change. Plenty more of Fox relaying EPA analysis and demanding action from government here: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ohio-republican-invites-buttigieg-east-palestine-town-hall-train-derailment-save-seat https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ohio-republican-invites-but...
  - corbulo 4y ago
    >Sounds good to me. Not every happening in the country needs a dedicated slush fund. If officials determine that this does, FEMA has already been in close contact with the people who they need to be in close contact with. You want to be the one who determines this? Run for office or apply for the job. You may be satisfied by tweets when it comes to government accountability but the point is not that they should have it's an explanation why not. > Did you do any research at all or just expect the media to spoon feed you answers? The sourcing in the article you provided is not the govt. It's random people from tiktok and a random expert (who didn't make the claim you're asserting). It appears you're the one not doing the research. Try reading before condescending. >Not something that can be answered by anything but waiting and seeing. absolutely false. The difference here is not one of opinion, it's how easily satisfied you are with the information that is already out there. FEMA tweets vaguely, a tiktoker explains hazmat science, and satisfies your every curiosity. I'm not so easily satiated for one of the largest eco disasters in recent memory at least.