Remove Carl Surran as Energy Editor

  • updated

Carl Surran has become a mini-dictator of the energy section, posting attack articles on companies he doesn't like (remember ETP spilling less than 1 gallon of mud?) and censoring/deleting comments that do not fit his political or ideological perspective.  I, along with many other energy regulars, believe Carl Surran should be reassigned to a subject that he is more capable of managing and that a new energy editor should be brought in to run the section in an unbiased and non-partisan way, promoting debate instead of censoring opposing political or economic viewpoints. 

George Moriarty

Thank you for your feedback. I'd like to share two important facts about your comment. First, our editors don't remove comments. There is a separate team that handles community moderation. Second, our editors curate news flow and post items that are relevant to shareholders in a company, without bias.


Without Bias? "Energy Transfer self reports spill" discussing less than one gallon of drilling mud, Carl Surran changed title to changed to "Pipeline Operator Reports Yet More Leaks", "Hai Phong Announces Exxon LNG Plant" changed to "Vietnamese city said to approve LNG project".  Is it SeekingAlpha policy to alter titles from AP/Reuters/Press Releases to paint them in the most negative possible light or is that something only Carl Surran is allowed to do?

If there is no bias why are news articles being titled so misleadingly?  Why is "good news" (finds, discoveries, contracts) showing up 4 days after every other outlet yet "bad news" (spills, terminations, renegotiations) shows up almost immediately, and it all happens in the same political direction? 

Discover a super massive field (Exxon Guyana anyone?) not a damn peep for weeks. Was Carl on vacation or deliberately ignoring it? Did he know and refused to do his job and break the news here, or is he so incompetant as an energy editor that the largest energy discovery of the last 25+ years just slipped by unnoticed?  Yet when BP makes some insincere gesgure and vague promises twards doing *something* green *sometime* in the future? FRONT PAGE ENERGY NEWS WITHIN THE HOUR!

Its become clear that your energy team cares more about politics than energy and the quality of your site has suffered as such.  Why is Carl Surran allowed to continue a deliberate left-green spin operation with impunity under the guise of "editorial control"?