If I'm honest, the connection is pretty tenuous. There is no doubting the green angle on the News of the World implosion is not quite as exciting as the media, political and criminal angles that are currently metastasising into what professional cynic Charlie Brooker today referred to as "everything-gate".
But there is a potentially significant green angle, and not just in the way News Corporations' admirable sustainability strategy is unlikely to be a front and centre issue at board meetings in the coming weeks.
A consensus appears to be building that the Press Complaints Commission (PCC), a body as toothless as a 16-year-old mongrel, will need replacing by a new regulatory body that – while remaining voluntary – will be backed by significantly greater powers.
It is early days for this mooted body, particularly given that the focus over the next few weeks will remain on crucial questions over the level of police corruption, the extent to which senior executives at News International are capable of redefining the term morally bankrupt, and whether David Cameron's credibility has been permanently damaged.
But once the dust has settled we are likely to end up with a new approach to press standards that can only benefit green businesses, climate scientists and the wider low-carbon economy.
For years, climate scientists in particular, but also green campaigners, investors and business leaders, have got a raw deal from our predominantly right wing press. It is unlikely, though not inconceivable, they have been targeted with the kind of despicable and illegal tactics the News of the World reserved for celebrities, politicians and, most appallingly, victims of terrorism, murder and war. But they have repeatedly faced news stories where their words have been twisted, their data manipulated, their research and comments reported out of context, and their arguments either ignored or willfully misunderstood.
There has been widespread resignation across the environmental movement that nothing can be done about this hugely biased reporting, and there is little or no point calling on the PCC to take action. Time and again errors and misrepresentations on green issues have been allowed to pass without any sanction, while on the few occasions corrections have been secured they have been hidden away near the back of the paper.
At the same time, there has been an equally widespread acceptance among politicians and business executives that the mainstream press has made it an order of magnitude harder for leaders to mobilise action to curb carbon emissions and tackle climate change.
As such, the proposals currently doing the rounds for a new press standards body with the power to properly investigate complaints, impose fines on papers that breach an agreed code of conduct, and force editors to give the same prominence to a correction as they do an original story, should be welcomed by green campaigners everywhere.
Such a regime would make it harder for journalists to willfully misrepresent climate scientists in order to underplay the risks arising from climate change, just as it should make it harder for them to cherry pick figures on the cost of renewable energy to fit in with their political agenda, or hide corrections when they are caught out. All of which has been remarkably common practice at some papers in recent years.
No one is suggesting that such a body would result in a media utopia, where coverage of serious issues is fair and balanced (in the true sense of the words, not the Fox News approximation).
Nor would we want to see a statutory press standards body that limits the freedom of the press and promotes boring and homogenous journalism.
Equally, no one seriously wants to live in a world where the views of climate sceptics or critics of green policies are not given a public airing. All the environmental movement has ever wanted from the right wing press is a level playing field on which to present their arguments, not one where their work is misquoted or taken out of context in order to promote a particular world view.
It is no silver bullet, but a more robust yet voluntary press standards body could help ensure climate scientists and green businesses get both a fairer hearing and some form of recourse when they are misrepresented by Fleet Street's less than finest.
World Economic Forum report considers whether major shift away from fossil fuels is likely within the next decade, or will take much longer than green business hope
For some businesses, the reputation boost among employees and consumers outweighs the financial impact of striking for the climate
Companies are increasingly in the firing line for climate litigation, argues Rebecca Byrnes at LSE's Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment
Latest report from Commonwealth think tank argues subsidy reforms and carbon taxes could see a quarter of UK land returned to nature