You’re right that Lang’s piece is a polemic and was not intending to offer its own path forward – though the blog he edits (REDD Monitor) is one based on analyzing REDD policy and often his other posts are solution-oriented. I respect Chris Lang a lot and think he plays an important role in the UN world around these issues. To be honest this piece was much more of an internal-movement venting piece. It wasnt trying to be anything else. Its readership is for folks frustrated with the popular mis-framing of critical issues, particularly around markets.

In general, I do agree with you that elevating the connection between forests and climate is a good thing, and the more it can get out there, the better.

But people like Friedman who have such huge reach and influence also have a responsibility that comes along with the size of their megaphone.

The role of a critic like Lang is simply a different role than one of Friedman, so comparing the pieces doesn’t compute as much for me. If Chris were writing for the New York Times, rather than an insider-blog, he would probably be writing different things. I think there is a role for people connected to impacted communities and social-movement bases to shine a light on the misrepresentation that happens among folks who do have a voice in the mainstream. And while this may seem mean-spirited, it is coming from a legitimate place of frustration of groups of people who have been tirelessly working on this issue for years and seeing our future crumble before our eyes.

Like Friedman’s column, it also “doesn’t explain how “we” are supposed to influence the U.S. energy-climate bill or the UN climate negotiations in Copenhagen. Or what “we” are supposed to do to “save” the 38 per cent of the Brazilian Amazon that is “still up for grabs”.” In fact, all it does is ridicule and lament someone’s choice of words.

I agree, it’s troubling that people take long flights all the time. But i think it’s a pretty big stretch to say that “On planet Friedman, as long as the “vast and endless carpet of broccoli” is still there, there’s no need to “transform the world’s transportation fleet so it is emission-free”. And on planet Friedman there’s no meaningful discussion of the issues involved.” The man has written whole books that are meaningful discussions of the issues involved.

At least someone in the nation’s biggest paper is writing abt tropical deforestation, isnt that a victory?