Do a quick Google search right now for “Fukushima ocean radiation.” The results are a crime-scene: maybe an actual link of reported, accurate journalism per page. Most everything else is panic-click blogs, catatonic antiestablishmentism, magically real takes on actual science reporting. You’ll find a couple of The New York Times articles in there, a couple of Reuters’ links, but usually above them will be a couple of pieces of reblogging art winning the traffic race over the source material simply by mangling that source material beyond recognition to something much, much scarier and conspiracy-minded.
It creeps me out to no end that this is how any number of my peers pursues information. I know just from having a Facebook account that a good number of them do and a good number of those went to very expensive and forward-thinking institutions of learning. Yet, among those beautiful brains there are many that will select RT or Natural News over anything with some slight concern for reality.
An event like Fukushima is the second-coming for shitholes like those mentioned above. It has radiation, a thing boasting like an entire page of different units covering some different aspect of a phenomenon so general in our world it barely has meaning as a single word. Tell me, otherwise, where does a sentence like “Radiation will reach the United States west coast” have meaning? It has plenty of meaning on panic-click sites, but absolutely zero in reality. Finding some specificity to a claim like that and, with it, a primary source is nearly impossible just out and out Google searching
By Michael Byrne
Read full article on Vice