Content and Purpose: Which Drives the Other?

Schugel, James. 2012. “Ash Pest Returns Early; Residents Told to Delay Pruning.” WCCO.com. CBS Local Media. April 18. http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2012/04/18/ash-pest-returns-early-residents-told-to-delay-pruning/ 

Sometimes the purpose behind a message produces construed content. Let me explain.

A recent local WCCO news report carried the message that Minneapolis residents should not prune ash trees during the time the emerald ash borer is emerging. The purpose of the suggestion (not law) is to keep the emerald ash borer population from spreading in the Twin Cities metro. However, the content misleads, or doesn’t provide enough reasoning for the suggestion.

For trees such as the Red Oak, pruning times are limited due to the method of infestation. Beatles that spread oak wilt navigate to fresh cuts (the scent of the fresh cut guides them). But the emerald ash borer has not been proven to navigate to the smell of fresh cuts. Instead, studies have found that they favor dying ash trees over healthy ones.

The main reason the department of agriculture is concerned is because they don’t want people moving wood. It actually seems pretty simple. “Don’t move wood.” They’ve established laws to enforce this (no one can move hardwood outside of Hennepin or Ramsey county), and they’ve done media campaigns. But still, the danger resides in a resident pruning an infested tree and bringing the wood camping, thus spreading the borer to the northwoods. That is the real danger. And the Minnesota Department of Agriculture has already sent this message. But they know the stakes are high, so apparently they aren’t stressing why pruning shouldn’t be done. This could take business from tree companies who only chip branches and never move them with trailers. The real danger is not having fresh cuts dripping spring sap on the lawn and attracting the bug. I think that could be lost in the quick presentation given on news channels.

Also in this broadcast, a graphic made me jump. “No more trees should die from this disease” the reporter quotes a woman as saying. Right after, a graphic zooms in on the screen. The graphic showed red and green dots all throughout the state of Minnesota.  The implication here is that eab has been found in all these spots! The spots are everywhere in Minnesota! What are they saying???

I watched the video clip again and paused it when the graphic zoomed in on the screen. This graphic wasn’t of dead or infested trees; it was a map of all the eab traps set throughout the state. Now why would they include this graphic instead of a more reasonable graphic such as a map of infested trees in Minneapolis? Could it be simple video miscue? Or was it an attempt to be sensational? I’m not sure, but I found it misleading.