When Maine officials tried to warn residents of the dangers of this winter's near-record snowpack, Big Media slanted the story, hampering efforts to warn folks of the danger.

"This winters [sic] near-record snowfall has created a flood potential that is above normal," began a news advisory

released by the Maine River Flow Advisor Commission on March 6th.

"Statewide water content readings from this week's snow survey are some of the highest since 1969, the 'snow season' of record, and in some locations higher than the record." In case there was any doubt, the banner headline on the release reads: "Spring Flood Potential Elevated Due to Near-Record Snowfall."

However, the lead in the Associated Press story in the next day's edition of the major regional daily, the Boston Globe, downplayed the threat posed by the snowpack, referring to it as just "above-average," and shifting the emphasis to concern about an approaching storm.

"The National Weather Service says weekend rain could cause some flooding of streets and small streams."

The story does eventually reference "near-record snowfall", in the 13th paragraph of a 17-paragraph story, with a spin that turned the Maine officials' warning on its head.

"While this winter's near-record snowfall has created a flood potential that is above normal, that doesn't guarantee flooding will occur this spring...."

The result? "There are people who are losing their property, their homes and their livelihoods," Maine Governor John Baldacci said after the flooding that officials had tried to warn the public about did occur last week.

Why did the AP and the Globe de-emphasize Maine officials' snowpack warning, especially when doing so endangered the property and safety of the public they are supposed to serve?

The Globe is owned by the New York Times Company. Both the Times and the Associated Press are heavily invested in the myth of Global Warming, or -- as I like to call it -- Global Warning. Record snowpack means higher than normal amounts of snow, colder than usual temperatures, or both. None of which readily fits into the MSM's chosen story line that mankind is giving Mother Nature a fever. Big Media's Global Warning bias has largely remained in the realm of theory; now it has begun to endanger people's lives and property in real time.

The AP and the Globe had the choice of reporting a truly inconvenient truth -- for them -- or of perpetuating Global Warning, of facilitating officials' efforts to protect the public or advancing their ideological agenda. Why are we not surprised by the decision they made?



