Do think information from this company/website is biased or balanced?

Question

Do think information from this company/website is biased or balanced?

https://marcelluscoalition.org/marcellus-shale/production-processes/fracture-stimulation/

Answer 1

Biased? Yes -- simply consider the source. From the homepage:

The Marcellus Shale Coalition (MSC) works with exploration and production, midstream, and supply chain partners in the Appalachian Basin and across the country to address issues regarding the production of clean, job-creating, American natural gas...

Their stated mission is to produce natural gas. Calling it "clean, job-creating, American" gas puts their bias right up front. Saying "clean" implies there are no ecological consequences. "Job-creating" tells the audience they're bringing economic development to the Appalachian region, jobs, money! And "American" drapes the patriot's flag over the whole enterprise.

So if I oppose the Marcellus Shale Coalition's efforts, that makes me by their definition "dirty, job-destroying, unAmerican" -- SEE? That's what bias looks like.

Balanced? No. Here, look at this sentence:

In some cases, producers are recycling 100 percent of their water.

Okay -- what happens in other cases?

Another example:

After a successful hydraulic fracturing procedure...

There's no discussion of risks or consequences of an unsuccessful procedure. What might go wrong? Based on this webpage we have no idea.

Probably the best example though:

Natural gas producers recognize that the drilling and completions process is not without short-term inconveniences.

All unintended consequences are completely dismissed as "short-term inconveniences" without ANY further discussion. Groundwater pollution, microquakes, stream diversion, any and all potential side effects are just "short-term inconveniences."

"Balanced" means, like in a debate, the Pro and Con sides get equal time and discussion. Do YOU think this is a balanced presentation of the issue?