Just as it happens with any issue that inflames public opinion and raises stress levels on a personal level, many tend to try to shoot the messenger than analyse the message.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Politics around elections will get tempers frayed, immigration sparks ire, councils get covered in controversy, and mining and the resources industry on the level playing field that is the Liverpool Plains and other areas of the north-west have become a verbal battleground.
Long-running protests, like in the Pilliga and Maules Creek minefields, have obviously frayed the nerves and stretched the patience of more than just police and the public.
Coal seam gas issues have continued to spew virulent opposition, sometimes with greater intensity than the resource it seeks to mine.
No wonder the terse and testy reactions from those who have been on the other end of the stick.
However, what is obvious is that when it comes to the issue of support and town allegiances, there is much bubbling away under the surface of the Narrabri landscape that is not just a mining resource. It’s a human condition fracturing the community.
The subject of fracking is fraught, so to speak, when it comes to the seams of community cohesion.
It’s been demonstrated a number of times over the past couple of years when this newspaper has reported on the Narrabri experiment.
The local newspaper, too, has been accused of paying lip service to locals worried about the intrusion of CSG into their lands but unequivocally supporting the Santos commercial enterprise as a great asset that shouldn’t be questioned.
This week, amid more claims from the local chamber that the majority of shire residents support CSG, the issue raised hackles again.
The environmental activist groups and local land lobbyists argue that’s just a lot of hot air.
They contend there’s no social licence or widescale support and that, in fact, most locals reject the CSG industry.
They argue surveys show there is continuing concern by north-west people about impacts on water and farmland.
Media are accused of broadcasting the messages of the many involved but often are wrongly accused of backing one message rather than giving a voice to others.
Most media attempt to balance out the stories, the statistics and the news angles – after all, that’s mining the issue for general consumption and interest.
Where you’ve been castigated by both sides for seemingly waving the banner for the other side, then it would seem you might be actually treading the middle ground.
