[1] https://www.propublica.org/article/stillbirth-prevention-leg...
[2] https://www.propublica.org/topics/health-insurance
[3] https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trov...
The American Chemical Council (previously named the Chemical Manufacturers' Association) have a section on their Wikipedia page accusing them of pretending to self regulate the industry by setting up green-washing programs that make progress slower than sites not affiliated with the program.
So without any further knowledge, I'd go with the journalists on this one.
Not to put too fine a point on it but even in your post, which was made in good faith, you said "American Chemical Society" when the link clearly says it's "American Chemistry Council" (though maybe there's some context I'm missing).
> One point about the ProPublica criticism did appear correct. Caucasians and Hispanics are predicted to recommit crimes at a substantially lower rate than they actually do.
> For Caucasians, they are predicted to recommit 25% of the time, but they actually recommit 39% of the time. And the prediction accuracy for both groups are substantially lower than for African Americans.
So the software isn't biased because if you use a different measure it ~accurately predicts recidivism for AA folks and dramatically underestimates how often Caucasian convicts reoffend? what?
Read the original story that prompted the chemical lobbyists to balk and point out where ProPublica says anything problematic. It's an extensively researched and data-backed story: https://www.propublica.org/article/formaldehyde-epa-trump-pu...
> I get that they are left-leaning, however, every single thing they write comes from the perspective of “let’s start under the assumption that a conservative perspective is wrong and let’s build a case to bolster that assumption.” They’re published not a single story that doesn’t lean left. The assumption that the “left” is always correct until proven otherwise is just a slightly more sophisticated appearing version of what Fox News does more overtly.
Is holding Biden's VA to account "left leaning": https://www.propublica.org/article/when-veterans-cant-access...
Or reporting on the Biden administration's family separations at the border: https://www.propublica.org/article/family-separations-biden-...
Or their lack of follow-through on investigating cyber attacks: https://www.propublica.org/article/cyber-safety-board-never-...
Or the failed FAA 5G rollout with the following quotes (https://www.propublica.org/article/fcc-faa-5g-planes-trump-b...):
> The process first ran off the rails under President Donald Trump. It then festered under the administration of President Joe Biden — which ProPublica’s reporting shows impeded the FAA when it finally decided to act — until a crisis forced an intervention.
..
> But a new impediment had arisen: the Biden administration. The White House was discouraging any public action, as was the FCC, which was now operating with a Democratic chair but was every bit as supportive of 5G and the telecom industry’s position on it as Pai had been. They assured the FAA that the agencies and industries could somehow still work out the problem quietly. (A senior FCC official denies the agency requested any delays.)
Their focus on civil rights, criminal justice and corporate abuses could be coded as left-leaning I guess, but those things seem to be keeping them pretty busy.
(Not enjoying how folks on HN conflate liberalism with "the left" when they are two VERY different things)