This week, it is becoming clear that the debate is becoming centered on two main issues: job creation and environmental safety. There is conflicting “evidence” regarding job creation with some sources saying that the pipeline will bring jobs back to the US and others saying that it would actually lessen the number of available jobs. Another issue is environmental safety, as news sources and activist groups alike are dredging up previous issues with oil pipelines spilling in the US. The agency in charge of regulating safety standards is not as rigid as need be, and there is reasonable concern that this pipeline will be able to get away with lower safety/spill standards just like the other pipelines. The problem is, is that the pipeline will be carrying bitumen, which is much harder to clean up than what the other pipelines carry.
The two selected articles this week differ completely in views as well as the issues regarding the Keystone XL pipeline covered. The article from the Daily Construction News focuses on job creation, probably because that is the main focus of the website, and references Republican opinions frequently. It also downplays the environmental concerns raised by environmentalists. The article from the New York Times, on the other hand, talks mostly about the safety concerns regarding past oil spills from pipelines in the US and the damage that they have done environmentally and economically. It is (slightly) more liberal leaning this week and aims to expose the problems with allowing the pipeline to continue. It also seems to be a more informed article, fact-wise.