|The reporter covering a meeting on the health effects of|
electromagnetic fields shouldn't have labeled expert
David Carpenter "controversial."
Photo: Getty Images/iStockphoto
by Mark Bartley, Letter, app.com, 29 July 2016
Regarding the July 22 story “Is The JCP&L transmission line dangerous?” I had always been under the impression that the purpose of a good newspaper was to report events as they happened without any bias from either the writer or management unless it is part of the opinion page.
With that in mind, I was confused after reading the coverage of David Carpenter’s recent presentation on the physical effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) to a group of Monmouth County residents at Raritan High School.
IANNUCCI: Lawmakers must take stand against JCP&L plan
The story referred to Carpenter as a “controversial figure.” What exactly does that mean? Is it the reporter’s place to label him as such in what should be an article merely stating the facts? Or is it the reporter or the Press telling us where they stand on this issue? Readers might be more interested in knowing that Carpenter is a Harvard-educated M.D. and that he is the director of The Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany.
Whether the Press feels Carpenter’s views are valid or not, there is no denying that the high-power transmission lines will change this part of Monmouth County forever. In closing, I would like to ask the reporter if he would purchase a home that sat below the proposed 230,000-volt transmission lines. If so he should contact me.