B.b.c. science coverage
- 20 July 2011 15:23115764interesting article from the independent.
The BBC's attempt to produce balanced coverage of science is giving "free publicity to marginal opinions", according to a prominent scientist.
Geneticist Professor Steve Jones was asked by the BBC Trust to study its coverage over two separate periods in 2009 and 2010.
His findings, published in a report by the trust today, have prompted the BBC to announce it will appoint a science editor.
Professor Jones, who gave the 1991 Reith Lecture, said the BBC presented "the views of tiny and unqualified minorities as if they have the same weight as the scientific consensus".
He highlighted issues including global warming and the belief the use of the vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella could lead to autism.
He said the BBC gave exposure to "ill-informed campaigns" during the furore over MMR and criticised it for giving the former chancellor and global warming sceptic Lord Lawson "space...to make statements that are not supported by the facts".
Professor Jones added: "There can be an over-confrontational tone to science news (although features suffer less from this problem). Equality of voice calls for a match of scientists not with politicians or activists, but with those qualified to take a knowledgeable, albeit perhaps divergent, view of research.
"Attempts to give a place to anyone, however unqualified, who claims interest can make for false balance: to free publicity to marginal opinions and not to impartiality, but its opposite."
Trust chairman Lord Patten welcomed the "comprehensive report". - 20 July 2011 15:32115769According to the scientific consensus at one time, the earth was flat. Later it was round but the sun went round the earth.I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
- 20 July 2011 15:53115775that is how i look at it, too often we hear scientists state clearly that something is a fact until it is disproved at a later date.
great new theories tend to coincide with someone having a book published.
i think the b.b.c. is correct in looking for a divergence of views and opinions, i suspect that the scientific establishment have had their feathers ruffled. - Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,905
20 July 2011 16:00115780After the pundits global warming theories, which could be normal climate changes, good luck to the fringe scientists.-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
------------------------------------------------------------------- - 20 July 2011 19:33115868Howard,
"that is how i look at it, too often we hear scientists state clearly that something is a fact until it is disproved at a later date" - that's how science works!
It's called the null hypothesis - if a scientist has an idea they postulate a hypothesis, then develop a null hypothesis to try to reject their hypothesis and until they can do this by experimental procedures (and provided the alternative hypothesis to the null hypothesis is viable) then the null hypothesis stands until it is disproven (hope that's clear
apologies for using all those words on a family forum).
The hypothesis won't be accepted by the science community unitl the experimental work has been peer reviewed (i.e. gone over with a fine tooth comb by people regarded as experts in that field) and then published in a scientific journal with sufficient information for it to be repeated by another scientist.
Even that process can have problems where the hypothesis goes against accepted scientific othodoxy (as in Peter's classic example of the earth being flat) and the people doing peer reviewing are part of that orthodoxy, which is what is happening with climate change sceptics at present - there's too much money involved worldwide to reject that it's all down to human activity.
Unfortunately once the science gets into the popular media then the facts can sometimes get in the way of a good story or the point the writers and editors are trying to make - I remember seeing a film of Richard Attenborough swimming with blue wales around Hawaii but unfortunately the very same shot had been used in a documentary on a satellite channel a few months earlier by the people actually doing the swimming who had a different view to him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_hypothesis
Hate to think though how you's start to postulate a null hypothesis on the likeliehood Vic packing in?
- 20 July 2011 19:39115870we are talking about the popular media though ray, it comes across to me that the bully boys in the scientific establishment want to force the new wave/fringe scientists away, stopping them reaching mass audiences on the b.b.c.
anyone who argues against man made climate change is classed as a looney. - 20 July 2011 19:45115872Howard, are you calling me a looney
We used to despair when the university press office called us to say a film crew were on the way to film some background for an item on the news - "OK lads, clear away the millions of pounds of state of the art equipment and get the test tubes full of coloured water out of the cupboard!" - Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,905
20 July 2011 21:34115893No Ray, that is me.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
------------------------------------------------------------------- - 21 July 2011 07:42115906And when a hypothesis challenges a dominant commercial organisation it is impossible even to get funding for the experiments.I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson