T.M.I.

The omnivore diet, as Michael Pollan suggests, presents the omnivore with a burden of choice. Everyday, we are faced with decision after decision of "is this good for me?" Similarly, the information age has brought upon a burden of too many choices. Before, student research was bound to the books in the library. Now, we must trudge through the endless streams of information on the internet to find useful, credible sources. Websites like Friends of Science and Grist demonstrate the difficulties of all this information; both websites present divergent information that they both claim is indisputable. How are we to make sense of it all?

In reading the Friends of Science page, I was immediately skeptical. I read an article about the follies of wind power and how the government needs to focus its subsidies on "efficient" fossil fuels instead. It became clear to me that this website has an agenda. Like Adrienne, I looked up Friends of Science on Sourcewatch and saw the allegations of a connection with oil companies. I wasn't surprised.

Grist was painful to read in a different way. I think this website encompasses a lot of what conservatives mean when they mock the demeanor of environmentalists. Grist articles are -- to be blunt -- absolutely obnoxious. One, about industrialized animal farming, points to Mcdonalds pork products. "What does the McRib taste like? Gym mats? Or PIG TEARS?" I had to laugh. The message, then, does not get across. I had no greater sympathy for crying pigs, no greater investment in the issue of sustainable, humane animal farming, and no interest in reading other articles on this website. I was hungry for some ribs though. On top of this, there are few citations and the bloggers possess little credibility (like myself). This website does not expand the conversation. Rather, it stifles it.