Disingenuous Protest Over Nuke Article

Dear Editor,
   William Adler's disdain for nuclear energy in general and the Nuclear Energy Institute in particular came through loud and clear in the essay "Will Shill for Nukes" [News, April 16]. We have heard Mr. Adler's intimations that constitutional guarantees of free speech end where discussions of nuclear energy begin, and we reject them.
   If U.S. citizens – engineers and academics included – choose to express their viewpoints publicly on nuclear energy and its myriad benefits – among which are helping to meet growing electricity needs and helping to clean the air – then that is their right. These accomplished professionals deserve better than to be maligned as "puppets" – as your newspaper permitted Mr. Adler to do – because they choose to exercise that right.
   A closing word of advice to Mr. Adler and the Chronicle: Steer clear of this year's political campaigns, lest you see like-minded phrases like "cut taxes," "increase funding for education," "protect the middle class," "save Social Security," and "reduce the deficit" coming from more than one candidate.

   [News Editor Michael King responds: As Mr. Peterson is well aware, it's not "free speech" that is at issue in "Will Shill for Nukes" – it's speech purchased by the nuclear lobby under the pretense of academic and institutional respectability. If he or the Nuclear Energy Institute want to submit op-eds to newspapers applauding nuclear energy, that's his right – but he should at least be honest enough to do so under his own name and commercial affiliation. As for the professors, they have their own reputations to answer for, as well as those of their universities, and they certainly know better than to do so with other people's work product.]