Looking at the CBC and especially the Citizen I ask myself "how can they continually write stories that get the facts wrong".

Since the new publisher has taken over the Citizen (Hugh Nicholson) the paper seems to print at least one completely erroneous story a month (it seems to be one a week at times)

I think you've hit the nail on the head Ben, the new crop of journalists have forgotten the golden rule - confirm your "facts" with at least two sources.

The National Enquirer understands that rule, it's a shame our paper doesn't.

But that's just 'another man's opinion'.

Good investigative reporting seems to no longer exist as we once knew it.
Regardless of whether or not the information on the formaldehyde issue was accurate or not at the time this all came about,something happened and something was poorly handled.
That's how we get to this stage of confusion and even inaccurate information could very well be part of a bigger issue.
This is particularly true when it relates to anything concerning the provincial government.
I just hope what we are seeing now with all the backing up happening that it is not just damage control.
We know there is a "hands-off" approach taken with the Campbell government by the mainstream media, and I just hope this is not what we are seeing again.
Unfortunately,it does SMELL like damage control.

I think that part of the problem is that we want our news as soon as it happens. Reporters have to get the news out before someone else does. I wonder if that tends to lead to shortcuts being taken facts not always being confirmed as that takes too much time.

None of the residents of Prince George knew as far as I know. Obviously the meeting where it was discussed was not clear on the subject. Am I wrong here? No one I have spoken to knew of the high levels of this substance...why? They may have brought it up but I do not recall anyone speaking of this since May of last year. Why? I am absolutely sure that this information would have spread like wild fire. Something just does not fit here.

So do I get an apology from all of the opinionaters who slagged me for my opinion on the 'sky is falling' news story?
Just kidding.

Good questions and points IMO!

I agree IMO!

So why not test the air in a carpet store to see if the formaldehyde levels are in fact as high from new carpet as the levels found in the tests in the Millar addition. Not sure if it can be assumed what the public is being told can be accepted as the truth. Testing will clear the air so to speak. If the high levels of formaldehyde are of no consequence why is the acceptable level of concentration set at 65 by the feds?

Sorry to disagree, but a test taken in July of 2008, and results released in May 2009 (after the election) still doesn't pass the sniff test. And why if the results were publicized in May 2009, didn't anyone know about it?
This still doesn't get the MOE and our MLA's off the hook for the failure to do some follow up tests to determine at the very least if our health was in jeopardy. Telling us they didn't want to panic the general population or that they couldn't find 10k to do the test doesn't cut it.

What! Our PG air finally gets some recognition and we down play it...

I totally disagree as well with the opinion expressed in the article.

The main point is very simple. As "resident" said, there are limits set by the province. Those are 370 ug/m3 for the action level and 60 ug/m3 for the episode level.

In the May 2009 minutes of PGAIR, which can be viewed here:
http://www.pgairquality.com/files/pdf/minutes/May26_2009_Minutes.pdf
the MoE reported the following:

"Formaldehyde – ...one sample exceeded the episode level by three times; three samples exceeded the action level
 MOE is continuing analysis and will provide update at next meeting"

The next meeting was June 2009. There was no update according to the minutes.

June, btw, are the latest minutes available on the web site. We now have March, 2010. That continues to give us a hint of how quickly PGAIR acts to get information ot the public.

The point?

Simple. The MoE sees a high level report for formaldehyde. They have not tested for formaldehyde for a decade or more because they think it is low and of no concern.

The tests (there were 4 separate ones at two different location, remember) could have been a false "positive" so to speak, or they could have been an accurate representation of how much formaldehyde there was in the air at that time in two different locations.

No one knows, until one does a follow up test.

It is now getting close to 2 years from the time when the original tests were done (July and August 2008). What does it take to get the MoE off their behinds to do their jobs to determine the veracity of the test that shows an unexpecteldy high level of formaldehyde?

Do we accept some bureaucrat's explanation that there is noting wrong, that it must have been a mistake?

Good Lord!!!!!! Where is this City going when we have such complacent thinking going on???

Want some more information that is out there on the PGAIR site and is not hidden?

This is the final odour report:
http://www.pgairquality.com/files/pdf/PGAIR_OdourPresentation(Nov2009).pdf

I defy anyone from the general public to interpret the graphs at the end. What does it mean to the health of people in this community. Is it just a lot of people spraying fabreeze out into the air?

As the MoE can say: "it is there folks, we're hiding nothing"

Well, actually they are. They are hiding the important part - the explanation to the general public what it means!!!!

In fact, as far as I am concerned, they are creating a concerned public when concern may not be warranted.

What industry in our area uses formaldehyde in their operations that could explain the dangerous levels found in these tests???

Canfor operations is shown in the National Pollution Release Inventory.

The one for the Canfor Northwood plant is shown here, as an example:
http://www.ec.gc.ca/pdb/websol/querysite/facility_substance_summary_e.cfm?opt_npri_id=0000001797&opt_report_year=2008

It reports as releasing 7.7 tonnes in 2008.

Canfor's PG Pulp and Paper Mills reports 15 tonnes.

what is the conversion from tonnes to whatever comes behind the 65 number?

I agree that the CBC needs a retraction of some sort - if you read thier article you would think we this is a coverup by some new world order and they alone have uncovered this entire story... Im suprised they didnt add in some blacked out SUVs and maybe a helicoptor or two - lol

I for one thank CBC for reporting what it did. Now at least the residents of Prince George know what is going on. The fact is that WE THE RESIDENTS did not know and someone did. I want heads to roll. STOP THE BLAME GAME ALREADY. CBC did not put the garbage in our air.

I don't have a problem with the CBC's reporting either. At least it's common knowledge now and something is getting done! The PG Free Press is pretending like they had it covered, but they did a horrible job of covering it, not even bothering to say how high the levels were compared to acceptable levels. It didn't get the information out to everyone and it didn't lead to any positive change whatsoever, so what good did it do? I'm not putting blame on them, but they should stop taking credit for breaking the story. If they'd done it well, we'd have had last night's meeting in May.

If we want apologies for this story how about the mainstream media apologizing for the Y2K and swine flu scares that never lived up to the media hype. Made good press for several months though