The Washington Post decided to adopt the Republican talking point that drilling for oil offshore will lower gas prices. It ran a sub-headline on an article about Obama adopting a compromise position "oil search would be part of a 'comprehensive energy policy' aimed at lower gas prices." In reality, plans to drill for oil offshore will have no impact on the price of gas. There is not enough oil there, at least according to the estimates of the Energy Information Agency, to have any noticeable impact on the price of oil. Neither the Post, nor any other major media outlet, has published any estimates of the potential oil available in protected offshore areas that suggest that it could have an impact on gas prices. Polls have shown that the public supports offshore drilling, presumably because they believe that it will lower the price of gas. This most likely explains the Republicans' commitment to drilling (along with some benefits to oil companies who may profit even from limited deposits of oil), since they presumably do not value endangering the environment as an end in itself. Since the public is obviously misinformed about the potential impact of offshore drilling on gas prices, the responsibility of media outlets like the Post is to provide correct information, by informing the public that drilling is not expected to have any measurable impact on oil prices even decades in the future when production is maximized. Responsible media outlets should not be repeating obviously false statements about the potential impact of drilling on gas prices simply because it is consistent with the platform of one of the political parties. By this logic, if the Republicans proposed drilling for oil in an important religious shrine, where there was no reason to believe there was oil, the Post would be telling readers that the Republicans wanted to drill to lower gas prices. It would describe those who wanted to protect the shrine as favoring higher gas prices. That is not responsible reporting.
--Dean Baker
