<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Easterbrook’s disincentives]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by Biodiversivist http://www.grist.org/article/easterbrooks-disincentives/ Sun, 28 May 2006 06:58:45 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/easterbrooks-disincentives/1 Another perspective

Slate gave him the rope to hang himself with. I like that. Blogs are raising the bar and just in time.

The for profit free press is fading. Now that Grist accepts ads, it too must deal with profit vs content issues. At what point will a potential advertiser proclaim that they don't like everything being published on Grist and how will Grist handle it? Hopefully, by telling them to get bent.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Help acquire and protect ecological hotspots, give to a conservation organization: http://www.saveourbiodiversity.com

]]> Another perspective

Slate gave him the rope to hang himself with. I like that. Blogs are raising the bar and just in time.

The for profit free press is fading. Now that Grist accepts ads, it too must deal with profit vs content issues. At what point will a potential advertiser proclaim that they don't like everything being published on Grist and how will Grist handle it? Hopefully, by telling them to get bent.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Help acquire and protect ecological hotspots, give to a conservation organization: http://www.saveourbiodiversity.com

]]> Comment #2 by Greengoddess http://www.grist.org/article/easterbrooks-disincentives/ Tue, 30 May 2006 05:08:36 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/easterbrooks-disincentives/2 Easterbrooke's dark record

I always read Easterbrooke's comments with a pinch of sea salt, having learned his true nature in the early 90s. He wrote a long piece in the NY Times mag about the African elephant. He claimed that conservation groups rang alarms about poaching, and called for CITES I regulation of ivory, only to raise money for themselves (by panicking animal lovers). He went on and on about this, how numbers of elephants were actually high, blah, blah, and oh yes, it's all about the money. I was thoroughly irked by this, but I truly put him on my s*** list when he came out with some Wise Use movement type of tome called One Moment on Earth (if memory serves me correctly). More blah blah. As a writer and environmentalist, I tend to rant against people who write badly (not to mention those who know squat about nature). However, there is a special ring in hell for those who write well about the wrong ideas (wrong as in not mine!), well enough  that they can misinform readers stealthily. Easterbrooke writes persuasively - but get out the NaCl!!!

]]> Easterbrooke's dark record

I always read Easterbrooke's comments with a pinch of sea salt, having learned his true nature in the early 90s. He wrote a long piece in the NY Times mag about the African elephant. He claimed that conservation groups rang alarms about poaching, and called for CITES I regulation of ivory, only to raise money for themselves (by panicking animal lovers). He went on and on about this, how numbers of elephants were actually high, blah, blah, and oh yes, it's all about the money. I was thoroughly irked by this, but I truly put him on my s*** list when he came out with some Wise Use movement type of tome called One Moment on Earth (if memory serves me correctly). More blah blah. As a writer and environmentalist, I tend to rant against people who write badly (not to mention those who know squat about nature). However, there is a special ring in hell for those who write well about the wrong ideas (wrong as in not mine!), well enough  that they can misinform readers stealthily. Easterbrooke writes persuasively - but get out the NaCl!!!

]]>