WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

1.3K

So far, claims about a supposed epidemic of food fires are mostly circulating on the conspiracy-inclined right. So, rather than amplifying the claims, liberal-leaning media outlets are applying unaccustomed rigor in debunking them. These efforts will probably do little to persuade adherents to the paranoid view. Journalistic fact-checking sites such as Snopes and Politifact have squandered their credibility in recent years by indulging in nakedly partisan smackdowns of politically inconvenient stories. And some of the groups trying to set the record straight on the food fires aren’t doing themselves any favors. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) does crucial research on fire prevention. But its media team could use some advice on how to talk to a skittish, skeptical public. The group published an excellent article attempting to put food-fire fears to rest under the unfortunate headline “Nothing to See Here.”

...and...

First, there’s the baseline problem: a list of nearly 100 incidents disrupting food supplies certainly seems like a worrisome trend. But what’s the context? More than 2 million farms operate in this country, and about 35,000 food and beverage processing centers. The NFPA doesn’t specifically track fires at food-processing plants. But it does report that roughly 5,000 fires occur every year at all types of manufacturing and processing facilities combined—nearly 15 per day. In addition, the group says, in 2019, “more than 2,000 fires occurred in agricultural, grain and livestock, and refrigerated storage facilities.” At this rate, perhaps we should be surprised there aren’t more incidents included on the lists of supposedly suspicious events.

I can see their point, but I am still inclined to think it's not a matter of the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon in action.

> So far, claims about a supposed epidemic of food fires are mostly circulating on the conspiracy-inclined right. So, rather than amplifying the claims, liberal-leaning media outlets are applying unaccustomed rigor in debunking them. These efforts will probably do little to persuade adherents to the paranoid view. Journalistic fact-checking sites such as Snopes and Politifact have squandered their credibility in recent years by indulging in nakedly partisan smackdowns of politically inconvenient stories. And some of the groups trying to set the record straight on the food fires aren’t doing themselves any favors. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) does crucial research on fire prevention. But its media team could use some advice on how to talk to a skittish, skeptical public. The group published an excellent article attempting to put food-fire fears to rest under the unfortunate headline “Nothing to See Here.” ...and... > First, there’s the baseline problem: a list of nearly 100 incidents disrupting food supplies certainly seems like a worrisome trend. But what’s the context? More than 2 million farms operate in this country, and about 35,000 food and beverage processing centers. The NFPA doesn’t specifically track fires at food-processing plants. But it does report that roughly 5,000 fires occur every year at all types of manufacturing and processing facilities combined—nearly 15 per day. In addition, the group says, in 2019, “more than 2,000 fires occurred in agricultural, grain and livestock, and refrigerated storage facilities.” At this rate, perhaps we should be surprised there aren’t more incidents included on the lists of supposedly suspicious events. I can see their point, but I am still inclined to think it's not a matter of the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon in action.

(post is archived)