Since Bookbinder is both currently a litigator in a set of global warming lawsuits against industries which supposedly paid «shill scientists» to lie, and was involved in a similar way back in 2010 as the Mother Jones article points out, those are relevant questions to ask. (gelbspanfiles.com)
It seems to me that the most likely explanation for the NYT «correction» was that the paper's editors were worried about creating a legal basis for global - warming lawsuits against fossil fuel interests, as «prior knowledge of harm caused» played a central role in the tobacco lawsuits — and the head of the American Petroleum Institute PR push is Edelman, previously of «second - hand tobacco smoke is not a problem» fame. (realclimate.org)
The Mother Jones article inadvertently reveals one other connection to the current collection global warming lawsuits in its description of Bookbinder's work in the then - current Vermont Green Mountain Chrysler - Plymouth - Dodge et al v. Crombie et al lawsuit: (gelbspanfiles.com)