How did you become involved in working with GreenDorchester?

I did an Americorps position in Dorchester with an organization where my supervisor was the executive director for GreenDorchester. I was doing the community events, web development, [connecting with] local resources… I transitioned from that generic work into environmental advocacy.

How is your experience working as an environmentalist in a multicultural, class-diverse community different from how it might be in another neighborhood?

One way I entered the topic is by thinking of public health, global health, environmental health, [and] global warming… There’s a lot of parallels in the ways people talk about global health and local environment… There’s a lot of issues of media [about] whose voices are heard.

The fact people have categories of global North and South [also applies to Boston]… In downtown Boston, people are healthier. In Dorchester, it takes longer [to get] things like Hubway… and there’s a media justice issue. There’s inequity in resources and in public amenities.

It’s harder to get things that are positive on people’s radar because violence has got everyone worried… You don’t read about community relations. There’s very serious local civic engagement in Dorchester and Mattapan. Neighbors really know each other. You don’t get that in other parts of Boston.

It takes different strategies to reach out to each community… A lot of it’s personal and trust-based.

What are some of the things that you do to be inclusive of people of different cultural backgrounds and income levels?

With extremely limited capacity, trying to get things multilingual, we use community partners to translate. If we have a Creole flyer, [we use] the Haitian listserv. Ethnic radio [is] a big one. Affordability, working to make that possible. [It’s] a huge issue, making sure the food cooperative and farmer’s market are promoted multilingual and multichannel.

When possible, we’ve given away bike lights and bike locks so safety is a free thing. We’ve given away free reusable tote bags and helped promote Renew Boston. All of these are things the city has money for.

Do you think that the environmental movement in Boston could do more to address these concerns? If so, what would you recommend that they do?

I would say that looking to local partners is essential and that does require financial help. City, state and federal groups need to find groups with established connections in the local community. [Local] groups have collapsed due to lack of funding… There’s this constant struggle for operational money. It’s very hard to get the money to pay people.

In the case of outreach to multi-ethnic communities, that’s very essential. [It might mean volunteering] to do the translation for a community meeting. It might mean spray painting… to do outreach.

Physical presence is a big thing. I’ve tried to make it there and introduce myself. To really believe you’re committed to everyone, people have to see you in person.

If you were going to introduce environmentalists from the rest of Boston to Dorchester, what places would you recommend they visit?

There’s a couple green space development projects – Nightingale Community Garden and the Talbot Norfolk Triangle. The Ashmont T station and the square around it [have] been redone. There’s public art, there’s a farmer’s market there in summer, and there’s a historical clock.

We did a multimedia historical tour with smartphones and [numbers you could call] at one site [in 2010 and 2011]. It’s called My Dot Tour. You could also leave your comments about what you were doing there. Last summer it was less theatrical but very multimedia.

Projects like that are great in areas that have a lot of history but people don’t really know. Dorchester is the largest, oldest neighborhood in Boston. Part of the economic development is the history.

Seashell by candlelight (Source: stock.xchng)

But an intriguing post at Treehugger.com links to a video which says cities are alive. Not in the literal, breathing sense of the term – but in the interconnected, fractal, neural network sense of the word. Cities may not live and die the way we do, but they do exist as vibrant, organized webs of activity. Here’s the video which inspired the original post.

TO UNDERSTAND IS TO PERCEIVE PATTERNS from jason silva on Vimeo

This quote from Steven Johnson sums up the idea beautifully:

“Coral reefs are sometimes called ‘the cities of the sea,’ and part of the argument is that we need to take the metaphor seriously: the reef ecosystem is so innovative because it shares some defining characteristics with actual cities. These patterns of innovation and creativity are fractal: they reappear in recognizable form as you zoom in and out, from molecule to neuron to pixel to sidewalk. Whether you’re looking at original innovations of carbon-based life or the explosion of news tools on the web, the same shapes keep turning up… when life gets creative, it has a tendency to gravitate toward certain recurring patterns, whether those patterns are self-organizing, or whether they are deliberately crafted by human agents.”

No wonder reading about news tools online is so entertaining. I’m watching a city of knowledge being built.

Extrapolating this idea to other environments could yield fascinating results.

Here are a few of the problems I see with this attitude toward photographing damaged cities:

1. Photographing poverty doesn’t end poverty. If National Geographic is reliable evidence, it’s possible to send photographers to visit many marginalized countries without changing the social climate there. A beautiful photo is just that – a beautiful photo. On its own, it is rarely a call to action.
2. “Ruin porn” photos don’t show the people who live in these cities today. We are left with the tale of an abandoned city – a place where one could mine old building materials or scrap metal – or build new construction. We never hear the stories of the people who still inhabit Cleveland and Detroit.
3. These photos lack the context a well-written news story could offer. Why are these buildings abandoned? Who chose to abandon them? What is their planned future now? What could it be?
4. Treating the genre as if it were “porn” trivializes the everyday struggles of people who still live in these communities. In these cities, people commute to work, attend school, struggle with crime, and engage in many other activities that they may not find sexy. Objectifying low-income communities is an unsavory habit.

Let’s rewrite the story and say: “These are cities where people lived and still live today.” Maybe people died because of the asbestos in those walls. These cities can be revived, but they are not blank slates. They already have a story and a context. While photographing ruins may be beautiful, it does nothing on its own to change these stories and write new chapters for them.

I have a colorful history with dumpster diving – literally. During college, I was nabbed by a bee while pulling a bright yellow vest out of a dumpster. I’m allergic to bee stings, so I remember the incident vividly.

In Madison, Wisconsin, where I went to college and grad school, dumpster diving is a very common and respected activity around moving season. Maybe hipsters dumpster dive now because college students started the trend.

Journalism is like dumpster diving because one has to sort through an extraordinary amount of unwanted and sometimes even repulsive information to find story ideas, places to comment, and references. This is especially true for environmental journalists, who have to sift through ugly sights and uglier statistics, sometimes obtained via the Freedom of Information Act, to dig up the dirt for their stories.

This story about dumpster diving in Grist made me laugh because environmental journalism is not for the fastidious. If you’re dumpster diving looking for the perfect pair of pistachio-colored flats, maybe dumpster diving is not for you. And if you’re writing about environmental issues, prepare to be disgusted from time to time – and turn that disgusting information into eloquent copy.

Environmental journalists are great recyclers of information. We take dry numbers, distasteful quotations, and unruly facts and turn them into stories people will want to read, bookmark and share.

What are your thoughts about journalism? Do you think digging through information is like dumpster diving? Or is there a better analogy out there behind your garage?

The anti-diarrhea kits will fit into spaces between the bottles in the classic-style red Coca-Cola boxes that are shipped around the world. Zambia is the first country to begin the program, which will start in January.

Coca-Cola advertising (country unknown) (Source: stock.xchng)

Over three years of public-private partnership building took place before these kits were ready to send out to Zambia. The process has been highly collaborative. Package designers changed their plans after hearing feedback from women who wanted reusable and not biodegradable bottles. The program developers also did local market research while developing the name of the package.

To forestall criticism of packaging medicine together with sugary drinks, Hockenberry commented that buying Coca-Cola is not required to receive the medicine. At this stage, the soft drink’s popularity could provide a logical route for sending medication overseas.

Obviously, this program does not change the larger health issues that plague sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of the world, but it is an interesting example of social innovation and resourceful thinking.

Question Authorities

Uncritical acceptance of authorities’ statements can cause problems in energy journalism. Here are some litmus tests for reporters:

1. Is the authority qualified to answer the question? If one is quoting politicians on the amount of oil present in a wildlife refuge, for example, errors are very likely. I’ve seen many examples of journalists missing opportunities to fact-check numbers from non-experts.
2. Who is funding the research? If the funding is tied to a specific industry or organization, that funding agency may influence the results. The relationship will vary depending on the organization involved.
3. Is the research public or proprietary? It’s hard to check numbers if their sources are confidential.
4. Has a third party confirmed the numbers? Checking third-party statements can end speculation.

Don’t Trust Statistics

The SmartPlanet article advocates “reading the small print” and “doing the math.” While checking details is important, there are some baseline assumptions energy reporters should understand before digging into the numbers.

1. Economic calculation methods, especially discounting, can be deceptive. Financially savvy experts can adjust discount rates easily to show environmentally friendly investments are impractical. Discount rates can make renewable energy or smart grid investment appear worthless because of the time it takes to recoup the money. Would the next generation agree? I doubt it. Discount rates are a way to account for short-term thinking; this doesn’t mean they are a gold standard which we should use to make all of our decisions.
2. Many energy programs lack effective outreach and marketing. According to Dan Ariely’s comments at the Behavior, Energy and Climate Change conference in 2009, telling customers that they will save a tiny monthly amount on their electricity bills may be much less effective than telling them your company has already donated to charity in their name. The lack of social science in program outreach may mean that programs underestimate the savings they could achieve.
3. There’s a large margin of error in estimates of fossil fuel resources. For example, some organizations will say peak oil has already passed us by. Other organizations allow much more time. Typically, in evaluating how much of a fossil fuel is present underground, companies and even government organizations will not have exact numbers for your story. If someone quotes a precise number, be skeptical.
4. Statistics may not include the amount of time and money involved in transitioning to a new technology. If you hear a “before vs. after” comparison without an estimate of the transition cost, pay attention. Companies do evaluate these costs internally, but they rarely become sound bytes. For example, if a company is considering a new nuclear power plant, the cost of insuring the plant should be part of the decision.
5. Experts may omit the social and environmental cost of an energy choice. Energy experts who focus on some questions – such as availability of oil or changes in electric rates – may never mention the local environmental impacts of oil production, the cost to society of air pollution and global warming, and other effects they did not quantify. The insurance industry is concerned about global warming for a reason; these “externalities” are real expenses.

Critical thinking matters in energy journalism. Many of these assumptions and credibility issues are subtle. One can’t expect reporters to view discount rates or oil reserve estimates cautiously. I hope this post will point other writers in the right direction.

P.S. All of the opinions here are my own and are based on my experience working with science news and energy data.

Poverty and housing

• In 2000, 12 percent of Native American houses on reservations lacked complete plumbing. This situation is almost nonexistent in the rest of the United States.
• In 2009, 32 percent of Native Americans were living below the federally set poverty line. The matching statistic for whites was 9 percent.
• Subprime mortgage lending has led to many people losing their homes. 61 percent of African-American women who borrowed mortgages in 2005 received subprime ones. The matching statistic for white women was 22 percent.

Journalism and diversity

• In 2008, 88 percent of United States radio reporters and 76 percent of TV journalists were white. (In 2009, 75 percent of United States residents identified as white.)
• 53 percent of foreign-born residents of the United States are from Latin America.
• The national average number of foreign-born workers in the labor force is 16 percent.
• Meanwhile, 64 percent of United States newspapers reduced their coverage of international news between 2007 and 2009. It’s unlikely immigrants made those newsroom decisions.

Environmental emotions and actions

• 61 percent of Americans surveyed said they were sympathetic to the environmental movement in 2010.
• As of November 2010, there were 1,280 Superfund sites in the United States in line for cleanup, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Does sympathy equal action? Not necessarily.
• In 2005, women became the majority of motor vehicle owners in the United States. However, only 26 percent of auto industry employees are women. Women are also more likely than men to believe global warming is a serious concern. Guess who’s designing our cars?

So when the New York City-based WE ACT for Environmental Justice set out to survey African, African-American, and Latina women this year to find out how they use beauty products and what they know about them, it was an important step toward increasing awareness of a long-standing women’s health issue.

“We noticed that groups conducting surveys around this have focused on middle-class white women,” Ogonnaya Dotson-Newman, campaign director for WE ACT in Harlem, told The Uptowner. “But there is a whole area of hair products that you wouldn’t know about unless you live in certain urban areas.”

Straight hair has often — and unfairly — been an occupational requirement for black women. TV journalism is one of the most problematic fields (see the Maynard Institute’s historical view of “good hair” on the TV news). Reporter Rochelle Ritchie’s 2010 story (right) about going natural with her hair — and doing so publicly — made headlines and is included in the Body Image chapter in the new “Our Bodies, Ourselves.”

Keonte Coleman, an assistant journalism professor at Bennett College, has more on Ritchie’s backstory and decision to cut her hair on TV, and the standards to which black women in professional media positions are often held.

“Maybe there aren’t any guidelines preventing natural hairstyles, but there is a culture in place that fosters the need for black women to look like their white counterparts,” writes Coleman.

The ingredients of hair relaxers, which many black women use to straighten their curls, are anything but relaxing. Almost all of the samples of currently available hair relaxers tested by Environmental Working Group (EWG) were ranked highly toxic, although limited information was available. Allergic reactions, hormone disruption, immune system toxicity and organ toxicity were four of the main risks.

In contrast, hair straighteners, which are more commonly used by white women, have generally been considered to be relatively safer. EWG’s website shows most of these products are medium-risk with the highest concerns being allergic reactions, immune toxicity and hormone disruption. These risks are similar to those of the hair polishers which are used by women of color.

That was the thinking, at least, until 2010, when concern about formaldehyde in Brazilian keratin hair straighteners made headlines after salon workers in Oregon and internationally complained of breathing problems and eye irritation. Formaldehyde is an industrial chemical that can cause a host of health problems, including an increased risk of cancer.

In response, the FDA this year sent a warning letter to the makers of the hair straightening product Brazilian Blowout, which was found to contain formaldehyde even though it was labeled “formaldehyde free.” (The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics provides a timeline and status update since complaints were first lodged.)

It’s interesting that the formaldehyde in Brazilian Blowout drew criticism from the FDA, while the many ingredients in hair relaxers African-American women use have remained under the radar. These relaxers, as well as costly hair extensions, have been on the market for a long time.

Yumna Mohamed, reporting for The Uptowner, summarized some of the research on black women’s hair products:

While hair dyes, bleaches and relaxers have already been linked to skin problems (including rashes, burns, itching and hair loss), a number of national studies are being conducted to determine whether women of color face higher risks of breast and lung cancer from beauty product exposure.

Dr. Mary Beth Terry, a Columbia University epidemiologist, published a study in May in the Journal of Immigration and Minority Health showing that African-American and African-Caribbean women were more likely to be exposed to hormonally active chemicals in hair products than white women, and used them more often.

“These products are often used daily and over the course of many years,” Terry says. “A number of these commonly used products contain endocrine disruptors and placenta, and exposure to these could cause women to be more susceptible to hormone-sensitive diseases such as aggressive breast cancer.”

WE ACT expects to release its survey findings in January. It will use the information to lobby the cosmetics industry and advise women about the dangers in hair products.

Originally published by Our Bodies, Our Blog and republished by WBUR.

I also plan to use this blog and my other writing projects to build a portfolio of paid articles which both supports my first career goal and stands on its own. Although this isn’t an ideal economy in which to start a second career as a journalist, I plan to use my writing to support my other work and vice versa.

For more information about my qualifications, please visit my LinkedIn profile.