NYT Term for Eco-Terrorists: 'Anti-Sprawl Activists'

Change font size:  A |  A

Opening paragraph from the item by NYT reporter John Holusha in the paper's house blog The Lede on the eco-terrorists who burned three new homes north of Seattle today [emphasis added]:

For people who are anti-sprawl activists — or have baser motives — a new-built house sitting empty in a previously rural area evidently makes a ripe target for an attack by fire.

Consider also the item's headline: "House Fires With a Message in the Northwest." Yes, think of it as a bonus. Not just a housefire . . . a housefire with a message!

Even the Associated Press manages to say it like it is in its article on the matter. AP headline: "Ecoterror Link Eyed in Wash. Fires."

First paragraph [emphasis added]:

Fires gutted three multimillion-dollar model homes in a Seattle suburb on Monday, and authorities found a sign purportedly left by eco-terrorists that mocks claims that the homes were environmentally friendly.

Holusha can't bring himself to call these people what they are. They're not terrorists, just "activists" sending a "message." Imagine if the "activists" had been promoting a cause the Times abhors. Odds it would have handled matters in the same understanding way?

Photo Credit: Elaine Thompson/Associated Press via NYTimes.com.