Fall 2008 Table of Contents

Feature:

Actress' persistence brings Rachel Carson to film
By JoANN M. VALENTI

Kaiulani Lee's play — A Sense of Wonder, presented on stage at SEJ annual conferences in St. Louis and again in Chattanooga — was screened in a world premiere at the Vancouver Film Festival on Sept. 30, 2008.

Sneak previews of the film took place at the Washington, DC Environmental Film Festival and the Maine International Film Festival earlier this year. The original two-act play, written by and starring Ms. Lee, is now a 54-minute feature film, shot on location in Maine at Rachel Carson's cabin by well-known cinematographer Haskell Wexler.

Kaiulani Lee. Photo courtesy SENSE OF WONDER PRODUCTIONS.

An award-winning actress, Lee has starred on and off Broadway, on television and in films. The play has been presented throughout the United States, Canada, and Europe for over sixteen years with performances at more than 100 universities, the Smithsonian Institution, the Albert Schweitzer Conference at the United Nations, the U.S. Department of the Interior's 150th anniversary and recently on Capitol Hill for Congress. A performance of A Sense of Wonder opened the 2005 World Expo in Japan.

The film, transformed from the play, is based on Carson's own writing, interviews with her colleagues and family, and extensive access to her personal papers. The narrative, a monologue, chronicles Carson's reaction to industry attacks after the publication of Silent Spring as she also confronts a private battle with cancer.

The film — reenacted now with cutaways to Maine landscapes, the sea and her adopted son (her great nephew) Roger exploring the tidepools — like the play creates not only an intimate portrait of Carson, but brings the viewer into each scene as if she is talking directly to the viewer, sharing her thoughts during one of the most trying times of her life. It's time travel and you're now Carson's personal confidant.

I previewed the film on DVD in August and interviewed Lee by phone. (I tried email but Lee doesn't type. The play was written with pencil and pad.) The Vancouver showing had not yet taken place. She planned to attend the festival showing for only two days. She's booked to perform the play throughout India for the month of October.

Q. How long did it take you to write the play, and when did you first perform it?
A. I had never written anything. I didn't know how to write it. I had boxes of stuff, collected information, readings, research, interviews with dozens of people who had known her, worked with her, particularly her personal secretary. Carson's literary estate had opened the doors to her personal papers for me. William Shawn [retired editor of The New Yorker], who had been impressed with Carson's book The Sea Around Us and serialized it in the magazine, is an unsung hero. He helped open doors. I didn't know what would be the arch of the play. My husband said watching me write was like watching a cow eat. I never even made an outline. But I had the great luck of having worked with great playwrights. I had a sense of the architecture of a play. Somehow it all jelled. I knew I was telling an intimate story. I could see the staging in my head, where she would sit or stand. After three years, it all came together. The first performance [in 1991] was in a hotel theater in DC for NCAMP [the National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides]. I was terrified. But when the lights went up I began to understand more fully the effect this play could have on people. Some in the audience were tethered to oxygen tanks, victims of poisoning. I was so moved.

Q. You seem to have been overwhelmed, completely booked with hundreds of performances all over the globe. With such obvious success, why so long before going to film?
A. My first instinct was live, let an audience experience life, not sit in front of a television. But everywhere I performed the play, people wanted "a copy," a recording of it to keep, to use in classes. Taping a performance is not good theatre. At the time, Ted Turner held the option for a film. When that ran out, I was given permission to film the play. There's no copy of the script, it's not published. The (2007) centennial (of Carson's birth) inspired the filming.

Q. You're listed as the Executive Producer. Tell me about financing the project.
A. I had never written a grant proposal. I used a bare bones, mom-and-pop approach. I contacted people who had seen the play and written to me. From June through the first week of August I wrote letters and made phone calls. In less than three months I had the support we needed. Everybody knew this would be a low budget production (working for little pay), but everyone loved the material. Our final production budget was only $200,000. Now we're working to finance distribution.

Q. How did you put your production crew together? Wexler [Director of Photography] seems an impressive coup.
A. A husband-wife team (Christopher Monger and Karen Montgomery) had seen my husband (an attorney) interviewed in a documentary film about food and later saw my daughter perform in concert. We were acquainted and I liked them. She's a producer and was looking for possible projects. He's a director. I hired them. They led me to Wexler, who had not yet seen the play, and then to a line producer from New York. We hired others from L.A. and added locals (from Maine), then shot in one week with a crew of about 14.

Q. Your performance filmed at Carson's cabin in Maine creates the feel of a reenactment, time travel back to experience Carson thinking out loud. How did you manage to arrange permission for the site?
A. I spoke to Roger (Carson's adopted son). I've known him for years. He said "sure!" He and his family still summer there. It's (the cabin) exactly as it was (when he and Rachel summered there).

A Sense of Wonder Director Christopher Monger (L) and Director of Photography Haskell Wexler (R) on location in Maine. Photo courtesy SENSE OF WONDER PRODUCTIONS.

Q. With most films, much ends up on the cutting room floor. Although the film seems true to the length of the play, I wonder if that was still the case in finalizing the 54 minutes of Sense of Wonder. Anything on the floor?
A. We had no B-roll! We just shot the play as two interviews. Then we cut out the questions. Chris (Monger) asked me questions; the answers were the next lines of the play. It was Haskell's idea, a way to keep the immediacy with the audience so it's not flat on the film. We didn't set out to do a big film. We didn't have the rights. We were limited by what we had. Wexler was brilliant.

Q. Now that you've seen an audience reaction to the film — in DC and Maine, soon in Vancouver — would you change anything?
A. There are things you wish you could do with more money, more rights.... I've learned as an actress not to ruin the experience for people. The play and the film are so different. A film with one person [actor] speaking is so unusual. But within a few minutes they're (the audience members) caught in it. "She" pulls you in. There's laughter, they cry, tearing up...and, so far, a standing ovation.

Q. You've said Carson's adopted son, Roger, has seen the film. What has been his reaction? Are you satisfied you've captured the message and meaning Carson intended?
A. Roger was in tears the first time he saw the play. He was only six (during the time period depicted). He didn't know she loved him so much. When he saw the film, he said, "Oh my god it's even better than the play. This is magnificent." He loved it. The place is now truly there.

Every time before a performance I ask for guidance, that I don't portray her as too ill, that I'm accurate, not too strident, that I find a balance. Do I think I got the essence, yes. It's a snapshot of her life. I want people to see that she started as a naturalist and became an activist. She had the science and the skill to write. She's such a role model, especially for young adults. Her courage inspires deeply. I want to show her as a human being, not only a gifted scientist or acclaimed nature writer. She had no partner, no old boys network, little money, a 9 to 5 job, and she was ill. She worked hard in the face of an infuriated Department of Agriculture and well-connected industry. She died at 56. But she changed the course of history.

Q. What's your goal for the film now? What comes next?
A. I've been told that Women's History Month (March) next year will highlight Carson. I want to work with them to find a way to get this film into every high school and college in the country. I'm also looking for foundation support to have the film everywhere by Earth Day 2009, at land trusts, churches, garden clubs, everywhere. This film's job is never done! It's like the play. My goal is to reach as many people (with Carson's message) as possible, and I can't be everywhere. I don't want us to lose her voice.

Press materials are available here.

**Excerpt from the current issue of SEJournal, Fall 2008, available to members only here. For information on how to join SEJ, including the benefits of membership, click here.

Back to the top

Feature:

Presidential campaign proves environment a hot story
By BOB WYSS

For the first time in decades, energy and the environment are proving to be issues in this fall's Presidential campaign.

"It will be a bigger issue than any time since the 70s," said Kate Sheppard, who writes about politics for Grist. "It can't be avoided this year."

The rise in stature also comes with the pressure to both understand and clearly communicate the environmental platforms of Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama. While both candidates have tried to paint themselves green, several national environmental reporters who have been covering the campaign agree that the two have distinctly different approaches.

"You are seeing these differences starting to emerge," said Margaret Kriz of the National Journal. She said significant philosophical differences exist between the candidates.

Opportunities exist for both national and local environmental reporters in covering this emerging issue during the fall.

Energy and environment issues popped up rather suddenly this summer, after being pretty much ignored during the primary campaign.

Part of the change was precipitated by oil prices that rose during the summer to as high as $145 a barrel and gasoline that was over $4 a gallon at many pumps. McCain quickly took the offensive, suggesting that federal gasoline taxes be suspended and that a moratorium on offshore drilling for oil and natural gas be lifted.

With energy so closely tied these days to climate change, both candidates were also able to better promote their global warming platforms. Again, McCain appeared to be more aggressive and successful in coverage on the issue, in such strategies as calling for building 45 new nuclear power plants across the country by 2030.

Coverage was intense at times, according to a review of the LexisNexis database of major U.S. newspapers and wire services between June 15 and July 15. A search for stories carrying the words McCain, Obama and war produced 2,633 articles published during that time frame. When the word economy was substituted for war, the database reported there were 1,850 stories and for environment there were 840. But when the word energy was used the database produced 1,998 stories.

Reporters agreed there were other reasons the environment and energy were not issues during the primary. Darren Samuelsohn of Greenwire said that as early as January he was reporting that McCain contended he had a stronger environmental platform than Obama. But strong environmental platforms do not play well with Republican voters in Republican primaries and McCain had few incentives to tout those views.

Meanwhile, the Democratic candidates, especially on the issue of climate change, had very few differences even when the race narrowed to Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Historically, Republicans have rarely embraced environmental issues, leaving much of the territory for Democratic candidates. But McCain can be different and he has been promoting himself as a Republican preservationist in the spirit of another GOP stalwart, Theodore Roosevelt.

Not everyone is impressed with his environment credentials.

The League of Conservation Voters says that McCain only voted on what it felt was the correct environmental approach about 25 percent of the time. In contrast, they give Obama an 86 percent rating.

Despite that record, McCain has been sponsoring legislation since 2003 that would control the level of greenhouse gas emissions by the U.S.

Regardless who wins the 2008 Presidential Election, change is definitely coming to the White House. Here, construction workers raise the final column on an exact replica of the White House located inside the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Museum in Springfield, Il. Photo courtesy PRNEWSFOTO, VIA NEWSCOM.COM.

Clearly, as many news stories have indicated, the real environmental mark of an Obama or McCain Presidency is likely to be how they deal with climate change. Samuelsohn at Greenwire points out, "This will be the first time a president will be talking about global warming from the Oval Office. And if Obama wins, he will be using his rhetorical skills in a way on this issue that has never been done before."

Both candidates stress a cap-and-trade approach in which the volume of pollution would be limited or capped but companies could buy and sell emission permits. Some stories have suggested that the differences in the two cap-and-trade plans are minimal.

Obama wants to reduce emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 while McCain has suggested cutting them by 60 percent. Another difference is that McCain would use market incentives to lower the level of carbon pollutants while Obama wants to use more federal mandates and tax incentives to reach his goal.

Sheppard at Grist says some of these differences are significant and most of the other national environmental reporters interviewed agreed with her. Kriz, in the lead of a June 21 article in National Journal, highlighted that contrast between Obama's federal mandates and McCain's market-based approach.

McCain's selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, and her carefully worded comments about climate change, opened new opportunities for reporters to explore the issue.

Other related issues also reveal differences. For instance, while McCain has called for more nuclear plants, he has not been as clear about what to do with the high-level waste they will produce. Obama has focused more on the waste issue, while being more vague about his thoughts on the future of nuclear generation.

Osha Gray Davidson, a freelance writer based in Phoenix, said reporters should also look at how the candidates stand on renewable energy. McCain's platform states that he believes in tax credits for renewable energy. Yet Davidson said he has been tracking federal legislation on tax credits for solar energy, which has failed in seven different votes this year, some by margins as thin as one vote. McCain missed all seven while Obama voted yes on five of those occasions.

Davidson said he received varying answers from the McCain camp on the Arizona senator's failures to vote. He said the example illustrates the importance of digging into issues that initially do not appear very promising.

McCain's "position does not seem to be consistent," said Davidson. "He seems to be getting a pass on his environmental credentials."

Obama has also faced some scrutiny already because of his ties to the ethanol industry in his home state of Illinois. Davidson said that Obama's relationship with the big-buck coal industry should be examined further as well.

It is possible that interest in both climate change and energy could decline if prices of oil, and gasoline, continue to plummet this fall. But many reporters believed that the spectacle of motorists paying as much as $80 or $100 at the gasoline pump is now firmly fixed in the minds of most American voters.

While the issue will remain, questions do crop up about how much of the story will be covered by environmental specialists and what types of stories they will produce.

In some respects, reporting on the Internet has made this choice slightly trickier. It is web-based reporters who have been left with tracking the most arcane details on the campaign trail this year and breaking an increasing number of stories before their more high-powered competition.

Sheppard at Grist said that this "rapid-response" reporting style has become important to her online employer and occupies much of her time. This is increasing the pressure on everyone who works on time-sensitive deadline and making it harder to dig for more comprehensive stories.

But at the same time, the Internet is also providing an increasing amount of information, not only in the form of news stories but documents and briefing papers, that makes it easier for reporters.

Dina Cappiello, who recently joined The Associated Press, said that the campaign reporters at the wire service usually get first crack at the breaking news. But she also anticipated that she would be involved both in the daily coverage and more comprehensive stories.

Despite the increased attention at the national level, reporters agreed there were still numerous opportunities for local beat reporters.

Cappiello, a former environmental reporter at the Houston Chronicle, urged local reporters to examine the candidates' platforms and then watch what they do locally. "Regional reporters need to look at how the candidates are playing to the voters and whether the candidates are being consistent as they move from one place to another," she said.

Or find an important local issue, said Kriz of the National Journal. The candidates may not have taken a stand on the preservation of a local wetlands or the cleanup of a toxic waste site, but local people tied to the campaign may have. How do those positions contrast with those of the candidates, and what is the fate of the local issue if McCain or Obama get elected?

For instance, when McCain earlier this year campaigned in Florida he toured the Everglades and vowed to help restore area wetlands. Local reporters responded by asking McCain why he had voted against a $2 billion appropriation for the Everglades.

Climate change is so big, added Samuelsohn, it can be localized in many ways, including by making it a campaign story. How will a local area fare if McCain or Obama are able to implement their global warming policies?

Local and national reporters will also have to decide what is important to pursue and what is not. During the primary both Clinton and Obama stressed that they were purchasing carbon offsets to compensate for the amount of air travel. Even before the political conventions began this summer, both political parties were promoting the amount of recycled paper and other environmentally friendly measures they were engaged in.

Journalists interviewed disagreed on whether these stories were valid insights into the campaigns or just political fluff. Regardless of the answer, the issue does highlight the importance of finding the best stories at a time when interest in energy and the environment has rarely been higher.

**Excerpt from the current issue of SEJournal, Fall 2008, available to members only here. For information on how to join SEJ, including the benefits of membership, click here.

President's Report:

Amid the newsroom wreckage, a bit of E-beat hope
By TIM WHEELER

I've never lived on the West Coast, but I think I know now what it feels like to survive a major earthquake. This past summer, my newspaper, The Baltimore Sun, slashed its newsroom staff, then redesigned the paper dramatically and shrank the amount of space for news.

Newspapers have been lopping off staff and dropping features for years now, but never had there been so much upheaval in such a short time. Suddenly, a lot of familiar faces were gone — at least one in five. Where we'd had three reporters covering environmental news, now there's one. One of my colleagues left on a leave of absence for a previously planned fellowship. But the other — dismayed by the cutbacks — left the paper to work for an environmental group.

It's a sadly familiar tale these days. This news earthquake is being felt from Los Angeles to Atlanta to New York, even to Toronto. Newspapers, once the mainstay of journalism, have been drastically reduced in size and reach as their readership and profits crumble. Radio and network TV news also have been losing audience. The number of people getting their news online is growing, of course, but has yet to make up for the drop in other media.

Amid such upheaval, it's hard to feel optimistic. But strangely, I do, at least about the future of environmental journalism. Rising energy prices, bisphenol-A, climate change, green marketing — these and other environmental topics are all over the news these days. They're not eclipsing celebrity fluff, sadly, or news of war and economic woes. But the frequency with which they crop up reflects people's enduring concern about their health and the health of the planet.

Even in their earthquake crouch, many newspaper editors seem to recognize the public's hunger for news and information about the environment. While 17 percent of newspaper editors surveyed by the Pew Research Center said they'd cut back on staff and space devoted to covering the environment along with many other topics, 22 percent had actually increased resources. We can only hope the others see the light — and the need.

Much of my hope for the future, though, stems from the commitment and incredible energy I see in this organization devoted to promoting the quality and visibility of environmental journalism. For all the tremors throughout the news business, SEJ remains strong. Membership is on the rise, soaring well above 1,400 through the summer despite the continuing drumbeat of newspaper staffing cuts. Free-lancers have surpassed newspaper reporters and editors as our largest group. But our membership in all categories, including broadcast, magazines, student and academic, seems to be on the rise.

It's a credit, no doubt, to the growing recognition of SEJ as the source for reporting on the environment. But it's also due at least in part to the dedicated outreach efforts of our staff and volunteer board.

Our conferences, meanwhile, just get newsier and more exciting every year. Last year's, at Stanford University, drew more than 900 attendees, a record. Registration for Roanoke looks to be strong, as well it should be. Our volunteer conference co-chairs, Ken Ward Jr. and Bill Kovarik, have overseen a small army of volunteers in crafting a meaty program that tackles the big universal themes on our beat while also casting a spotlight on a neglected region, Appalachia.

But SEJ isn't taking the future for granted as the news landscape shakes and tilts. Your board of directors has been working hard to ensure that the group remains relevant and vibrant.

You're reading a product of that effort. One of the most visible changes in the past year has been the stunning, color-rich redesign of SEJournal,* our quarterly newsletter. Unlike some of the facelifts newspapers have been going through lately, this one enhances a truly substantive publication, with more useful features and information in it than ever.

It's taken a bit longer to revamp SEJ's Web site. But the groundwork has been largely completed, and an appealing, more user-friendly look is coming very soon. A team of volunteers has been hard at work "migrating" content from our current Web site to the new framework. Stay tuned, and please don't be shy if you [are a member and] have a yen to help out with this exciting project: SEJ VP Christy George, 503-293-4001.

Our awards program, recognizing outstanding environmental journalism, has seen remarkable growth. Last year, we granted SEJ's first award for student work. This year, with the help of a generous benefactor, SEJ is honored to present another first: a $10,000 prize to the author of an outstanding nonfiction book about the environment.

Award-winning journalism doesn't just happen, however. SEJ has been working to help journalists cover the climate story in all its complexity and sweep. We've hosted or cosponsored workshops for reporters and editors across the country to provide background on the science, the health implications, the policy responses and the positions of the presidential candidates. We've staged environmental reporting workshops at other journalism conferences, including the Associated Press Managing Editors and Society of American Business Editors and Writers.

SEJ has been just as active this past year in its advocacy for journalists' ability to report on and gather information about the environment. We've stood up for the rights of journalists and the public to take pictures, video and audio recordings in national parks and on other federal lands. We've also argued for keeping information about farm animal health in the public domain.

Less visibly, but no less important, the board has reorganized SEJ's top staff in an effort to sustain the important activities I've described above, plus others. Chris Rigel, our longtime associate director, was promoted to director of programs and operations. She's taken on expanded responsibilities in planning, marketing, coordinating and executing all of SEJ's programs and services. Chris's promotion enables Beth Parke, our executive director, to focus her extensive experience and abilities on fund-raising and strategic direction for SEJ. Through this, and an ambitious fundraising effort, we hope to ensure that SEJ can continue to be the source for covering the environment, no matter what medium journalists use in the years to come.

I don't mean to make light of the challenges ahead, either for journalists or for SEJ. It's hard to see what the future holds just now, or how independent, enterprising reporting on the environment will continue and grow. But I do know that the need has never been greater. And I see a lot of other survivors out there, picking themselves up after the earthquake and heading out to get those stories, with SEJ there to help and support them. I plan to be among them.

This is my last column for SEJournal,* as I conclude two years as SEJ's president. I'm honored that the board — and indirectly, you members — have entrusted this important position to me. It's been challenging at times, not least this summer, but rewarding far beyond the trials. There's no other journalism I'd rather be doing, and no other group I'd rather be doing it with, than you here at SEJ. Thank you for the privilege. See you in Roanoke, and beyond!

**Excerpt from the current issue of SEJournal, Fall 2008, available to members only here. For information on how to join SEJ, including the benefits of membership, click here.

Back to the top

The Society of Environmental Journalists
P.O. Box 2492 Jenkintown, PA 19046
Telephone: (215) 884-8174 Fax: (215) 884-8175
sej@sej.org

© 1994 Society of Environmental Journalists
The SEJ logo is a registered trademark ® of the Society of Environmental Journalists. Neither the logo nor anything else from the sej.org domain may be reproduced without written consent of the Society of Environmental Journalists.