"We can't allow things that are inaccurate to stand." — The Word of Our Dan, February 19, 2008.

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

When is a "deal" not a "deal"?

Another day, another ill-chosen media spin on the non-Lower Churchill non-deal, this time from the Western Star, headlining a Moira Baird story:

Lower Churchil; Hydro reaches tentative deal for electricity
an assertion which is flatly contradicted by the lede:

ST. JOHN’S — It’s not a power sale, but Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro has a tentative deal with two Nova Scotia companies interested in electricity from the Lower Churchill.
If the Western Star headline writer had actually read the story (as the Telegram headline writer did; in National Capital the headline was "Hydro explores maritime route; Will discuss options with Emera and N.S. Power in coming months") he or she should would have noted that the agreement is not a "deal", and definitely not for "electricity":
They will study the technical, economic, financial and regulatory issues of using a maritime route to export Lower Churchill power to Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and New England.

Those discussions will take place in the coming months.

“It’s an agreement to explore jointly,” said Ed Martin, president and CEO of NL Hydro. “So we’re going to have sharing of data and some indepth technical and cost discussions, and we’ll know within a couple of months of having those discussions … if there’s a basis that makes sense for us.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home