Bad Science Journalism Gets Schooled

TaeKwonDood writes "Biology post-doc Dr. Michael White takes a look at the '2007 Best American Science and Nature Writing' and doesn't like what he finds in an article called Bad Science Journalism and the Myth of the Oppressed Underdog. Turns out it's not just political writers who pick a position they want to advocate and then write stories to confirm it. Science journalism gets a scolding and it's been a long time coming."

Comments

Re:Biased journalism may lead to biased science

[JoshJ]

I'm not a biologist, but it's painfully obvious why so much reporting is done about biology.
Specifically, one element of biology. Evolution. Despite the fact that it's been demonstrated in the lab and has been widely accepted as theory in the scientific community for over a century now, there is a massive group of people who refuse to accept evolution because it conflicts with their religious brainwashing.

Re:Science has always been biased

[urcreepyneighbor]

To an extent that's true, but science is science and sooner or later the facts will win out over dogma. Tell that to the Creationists and the reporters that cover their sorry asses.

Re:Can you cite these?

[TFGeditor]

"Since the very first reference I put my hands on indicates that you are unfamiliar with the scientific literature predating 1990, why should I pay attention to anything else you say?"

Because you are ignoring that I pointed out I did not reference "greenhouse effect" as you claimed.

Re:Can you cite these?

[TFGeditor]

No, not trolling. I specifically challenge that literature predating the 1990s references "global warming."

Re:Can you cite these?

[TFGeditor]

'... "Global warming" in the title aren't discussing global warming?'

Those are your words, not mine. The body of the text is what is at issue.