[amzn_product_post]
[amzn_product_post]
[amzn_product_post]
green4us
Climate Desk’s three-part series explores who gets to define the truth about climate change in the digital age. James West/Climate Desk If you’ve ever read anything on the Internet, chances are you’ve encountered a troll. No, not the kind that live under bridges, or the ones with a shock of neon hair. We’re talking about those annoying commenters who get their kicks by riling people up as much as possible. But have you ever wondered who these people really are? Well, we found out. Internet researchers at George Mason University recently found that when it comes to online commenting, throwing bombs gets more attention than being nice, and makes readers double down on their preexisting beliefs. What’s more, trolls create a false sense that a topic is more controversial than it really is. Witness the overwhelming consensus on climate change amongst scientists—97 percent agreement that global warming is real, and caused by humans. But that doesn’t settle the question for Twitter addict and Climate Desk perennial thorn-in-the-side Hoyt Connell: “If you allow somebody to make a comment and there’s no response, then they’re controlling the definition of the statement,” Hoyt says. “Then it can become a truth.” We first encountered Hoyt, or as we know him, @hoytc55, several months ago on our Twitter page, taking us to task for our climate coverage. And the screed hasn’t stopped since: In April alone, Hoyt mentioned us on Twitter some 126 times, almost as much as our top nine other followers combined. So we did the only thing we knew how to do: track him down, meet him face to face… and ask a few questions of our own. Watch Episode One of our three-part series Meet the Trolls: Trollus Maximus: While it might not always seem this way, many of our followers actually do believe in climate change. Some are silent, watching from the wings, what internet researchers call “lurkers.” Not Rosi Reed, a 34-year-old nuclear physicist at the Large Hadron Collider and long-time Internet truth crusader, who goes by the nom-de-guerre PhysicsGirl. We like to call her The Troll Slayer: For better or worse, online, people have the luxury to lob bombs from behind a keyboard barricade. Which led us to launch an experiment: What if the trolls and the troll slayers met face to face and talked it out, analog-style (or as close as we can get with Google Hangout)? For all their differences, Hoyt and Rosi have one thing in common: they aren’t cowards. They agreed to square off in a debate about online commenting, climate change, and what defines truth in the digital age. Watch Episode Three, The #Showdown:
From –
VIDEO: The Secret Life of Trolls
Protected: Meet The Climate Trolls: a Three-Part Climate Desk Series
How NASA Scientists Are Turning L.A. into One Big Climate-Change Lab
Climate Desk Live: A Conversation With Climate Scientist Michael Mann
Protected: VIDEO: Meet the Climate Trolls
VIDEO: What’s It Like to Land on an Aircraft Carrier?
Source:
This week, McDonald’s announced that it will start serving a lot more fast-food fish starting next month, in the form of “Fish McBites” that it hopes will boost sales.
The company also announced that all those bites, plus its Filet-O-Fish sandwiches, will be made from sustainable, wild-caught Alaska pollock, with the Marine Stewardship Council’s stamp of approval right there on the box.
Marine Stewardship Council
The MSC “is proud to support McDonald’s and its commitment to sustainability.” The fast-food giant has been serving four kinds of MSC-labeled sustainable fish in European locations since October 2011.
Is this the part where I’m supposed to say, “Yay McDonald’s”? Because yeah, that’s not happening.
Not all conservation groups can agree on what’s a sustainable fish and what’s not, and often what’s sustainable today is overfished tomorrow, especially when a company with an appetite as big as McDonald’s is involved.
Alaska pollock is not considered a “best choice” on the respected Seafood Watch list put out by the Monterey Bay Aquarium; rather, it’s lumped into the middle “good alternative” category. From Seafood Watch:
Alaska Pollock populations are moderately healthy, but their numbers have been declining. Alaska Pollock are now at their lowest levels in over 20 years.
The fishery uses midwater trawling gear that’s designed to not impact the seafloor. However, these midwater nets contact the seafloor an estimated 44% of the time—resulting in severe damage to seafloor habitats of the Bering Sea.
Alaska pollock fishing operations also catch up large numbers of declining Chinook salmon, and might be hurting the endangered Steller sea lions and Northern fur seals that rely on the pollock for food.
Even presuming Alaska pollock is a “good alternative,” there’s still the matter of, you know, everything else McDonald’s does, from serving antibiotic-laden meats to leading the fast-food industrial complex. McDonald’s may be improving its treatment of fish, but it’s not improving its treatment of workers.
Susie Cagle writes and draws news for Grist. She also writes and draws tweets for
.
Read more:
,
Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories
Link:
McDonald’s new sustainable fish is — surprise! — not so sustainable
Libros
