I took a drive in the snow yesterday. It was Friday, so I tuned in to NPRs "Science Friday." I don't usually listen to NPR because it has become a propaganda machine for the corporatists of America. One segment I listened to had an author who had written a well researched book on Chernobyl. He and the host billed Chernobyl as the worst nuclear disaster in history and did some comparison with Three Mile Island. One thing missing in the entire talk was any mention of Fukushima, which has been pouring radiated water into the ocean for the last 8 or 9 years. Propaganda is everywhere, even on a supposedly public owned radio station.
I have to agree with the original post. I had been a member of NPR for nearly 20 years, but after the last presidential election the news programs, particularly Morning Edition do not practise the level of journalism they once did. Some of the third party shows are very good: The 1A, Here and Now, Fresh Air, are top notch.
That's because Fukushima is not pouring irradiated water out anywhere. The frozen earth barrier that is supposed to prevent leakage into groundwater is not 100% effective, but the amount of radionuclide transport is low and slow.
The reason Fukushima is not in the news is because it is boring. Very small increase in exposure, Fukushima fish regularly tested and back on the market, slow, painstaking and dull process of decommissioning and decontamination underway - it's not exactly going to light up the headlines.
Unfortunately, like everything else in the world, it takes lots of money to fund this media. There are even some ads referring to such and such an organization as sponsors (like Amazon). I feel NPR has to appeal to a broad spectrum and can't afford to come out with inflammatory speech (I suspect they have a bevy of lawyers telling them what they can and cannot say). One other thing I have noted that they often do have critical reports but then go on to mention that the industry they are criticizing is also a sponsor. That's called independent reporting and we need to see more of that especially in the periodicals (Smithsonian had done that but I have not seen much lately. Unfortunately, the public contributions have fallen and the government keeps cutting their subsidies so to stay solvent NPR/PBS has to get outside funding.