I don’t generally buy the ‘editorial inconsistency’ argument.

I frankly enjoy reading your blog daily to keep me aware of developments in industries/areas that otherwise would escape my attention.

I mentioned it on my blog: http://misteriotremendum.sevenandsix.com/2008/01/12/bravo-psfk-piers-fawkes-ces-an-orgy-of-poison/

I appreciate your efforts and understand the need to push in a sometimes difficult direction. I would just expect something that offers solutions instead of only laying problems to bare. Think creatively, people! That is your stated objective, no?

“Ironically, CES says that it is reducing its own impact on the environment wherever it can – but it doesn’t seem to register that it’s actually contributing to a greater problem than the number of nonrecycled water bottles left over at the end of the show.”

Is it really that ironic? If they are infact reducing in SOME ways, which still puts them ahead of running the show like always an not doing that?

I used to love reading PSFK to hunt through the debris for glimpses of actual trend reporting, but i’m sad to see that this is what its come down to! So which companies and products DID you guys like and admire from “the C.E.S.”?

And way to blame asia ~

As unpleasant as it may be, perhaps CES is the symptom, not the sickness. A symptom showing that green may not yet be a mass market concern.

On a side note: the fact that Vegas on a day to day basis is just as much to be worried about from an environmental/sustainability standpoint.

Our job is to inspire our readers to make change for the better.

That’s our editorial opinion and we’ll write about what we like. It’s not as if you’re paying, is it?

We’ll write about jets because it could signify a return to a different way of business travel. We’re not celebrating the fact – we’re just highlighting the return of supersonic travel. The ecological damage that the electronics industry creates is going to be rather larger than a few jets.