Anchorage Edition: June 27

Fri, June 27, 2008
Posted in Anchorage Edition

Each week, host Michael Carey gathers journalists and commentators for a review of the week’s news, politics and public affairs in Anchorage and Alaska. Today’s topics include:

Supreme Court ruling on Exxon Valdez oil spill litigation.
Barack Obama campaign claims to fight for Alaska’s electoral votes.
Reflection on 50 years of Alaska Statehood.

HOST: Michael Carey, Independent Journalist

GUESTS:

Tim Bradner, Alaska Journal of Commerce
Paul Jenkins, voiceofthetimes.net

KSKA (FM) BROADCAST: Friday, June 20, 2008 at 7:30 p.m.

KAKM (TV) BROADCAST: Friday, June 27, 2008 at 9:00 p.m. Repeats Saturday, June 28, 2008 at 5:00 p.m.

PARTICIPATE:

Send e-mail to anchorageedition [at] kakm [dot] org
Post your comment or question below

SUBSCRIBE: Get Anchorage Edition updates automatically by e-mail, RSS or podcast.

Standard Podcast [26:43m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Comments

One Response to “Anchorage Edition: June 27”

Sylvia Lange on July 5, 2008 at 1:21 pm

Wow! As someone in the “effected area”, of course I was shocked by the ruling. Never mind I personally would get little from the suit. I always thought is was a matter of justice that Exxon be made to pay. If you or I did anything nearly as destructive to so many, we would be ruined. One certainly would have been punished. I don’t believe any one could reasonably conclude that Exxon felt any punishment of consequence whatsoever. While I was stunned by the ruling, I was not prepared to be shocked by lack of empathy or reflection from my fellow Alaskans. Your panel actually blamed the victims: “unrealistic expectations… hopeful that something would come out of this… false hopes” or that (oh my!) “actually planned their children’s college fund on this”. Most of us, of course, did none of those things. Many, in fact, died (about 6,000, I understand). But whatever expectations anyone had, at least those of us in Prince William Sound, was no greater than what we would have otherwise expected from the herring fishery alone, that completely disappeared. It was never part of the compensatory damages, and we were never “compensated” in any way for the loss. The science wasn’t there at the time. Irregardless of our personal losses, we thought a positive ruling would help future generations in protections from “reckless’ behavior by large corporations. Well, we lost, but I am surprised that your panel saw it only as our individual loss, not as a greater community or societal loss, which I believe it was on many levels. Have we as individuals, businesses, and government become so completely dependent upon the oil company’s money and product, that we can no longer see beyond those needs, or mature enough to engage the discussion on an equal basis, or we forever stuck in an unequal relationship with these corporations?