Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Who you calling "pesticide-covered?"
The magazine Fast Company has done a story on golf courses and how they're trying to "clean up their act."
It's probably a bad sign when the descriptions "water-sucking" and "pesticide-covered" are both used in a headline, isn't it?
Well, they tried to do a story that was positive. And three of their sources -- Audubon International, the GCSAA and the Golf Environmental Organization -- did a fine job of representing the industry. It's the in-between that hurts.
Why compare a golf course's water use with the water use of a family of four? Wouldn't it be more accurate to compare a business versus a business? Maybe even use a business like golf that depends on water?