The Pacific Ocean Isn't Dying Because of Fukushima

Rare is the scientific press release that hits the exact necessary gravity of the research: They tend to either be mind-numbingly complex, unnecessarily boring, or so sensational as to be unbelievable (and inaccurate). The Oreos-are-as-addictive-as-cocaine press release from a few months ago falls into the latter category, countless others that get no press whatsoever fall into the first two.

It is better, unequivocally, to fall into the first category: The scientists’ research may be ignored, but at least it won’t be ridiculed and is less likely to turn into some viral media firestorm that gets a lot of eyeballs but in turn makes those eyeballs roll into the back of their respective sockets.

But sometimes, one of those dense, responsible press releases will find its way into a fear-mongering story that makes its way all over the internet. That’s what happened to the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute, which, back in November, put out a press release called “Feast and famine on the abyssal plain.”

The gist of the press release is that certain events can cause massive blooms of diatoms (microscopic alga) to sink to the ocean’s floor. These events allow organisms living on the bottom of the sea to survive for years, when the “marine snow”—a steadily falling dust of body parts and organic matter sinking to the bottom of the ocean—isn’t enough to sustain communities. The most inflammatory or newsworthy suggestion in the entire press release was the theory that some of these “feast” events “might be related to global warming.” But then again, they “could simply reflect naturally occurring long-term cycles in the ocean.” It was, by any estimation, a boring press release.

But then last week, a widely-shared article over at NaturalNews.com went and correlated these mass alga blooms with Fukushima, and shit went crazy. In that story, titled “Study: Dead sea creatures cover 98 percent of ocean floor off California coast; up from 1 percent before Fukushima,” author Ethan Huff says that “though the researchers involved with the work have been reluctant to pin Fukushima as a potential cause—National Geographic, which covered the study recently, did not even mention Fukushima—the timing of the discovery suggests that Fukushima is, perhaps, the cause.”

That is a totally irresponsible thing to do for a journalist—make wild assumptions based on nothing other than a couple dates and the thoughts of a National Geographic commenter named “Grammy.” Of course, NaturalNews is not exactly a bastion of truth: David Gorski, an oncologist and science writer, once called it “one of the most wretched hives of scum and quackery on the Internet,” and the “story” was generally ignored by reputable news sources.

That didn’t stop it from going viral and getting a quick segment from the arbiters of the truth over at InfoWars, who said “the location and the timing of this massive die off in the ocean points the finger at Fukushima,” and proclaimed that “the Pacific Ocean is dying.”

Which brings me back to my earlier point: Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute was none too pleased with any of this, saying that the stories are “false and misleading.” Their boring, albeit accurate and scientifically dense, press release and study had been co-opted by someone with an agenda, and their name—and study—was being plastered all over the internet to support it.

“In addition, there is absolutely no connection between MBARI’s research findings and radiation from the Fukushima disaster,” they wrote. Furthermore, dead sea creatures are everywhere, they said, because living things, especially single-celled ones, “come and go,” and “eventually die.”

Journalists rely on press releases for content and they rely on studies for evidence and support for stories, but there’s a difference between using a study to responsibly illustrate a point and using one to push an agenda because the two timelines happen to match up. It is, of course, irresponsible to say that what amounts to a bunch of dead plankton regularly sinking to the bottom of the sea means the Pacific Ocean is dying. Drawing the link where there is none takes two real issues—Fukushima and the health of the ocean—and trivializes both.

But when websites trade in clicks, viral sharing, and the idea that no one is ever going to call them on their nonsense, why give a shit about the truth?