***URGENT*** Skeptic Exchange will close down very soon unless you visit Area 51 and vote for it!
1

(Note: I live in the US, so that's the perspective I see this from at the moment.)

I'm sure many of us have encountered anecdotal examples of poor science reporting in the media, or credulous/unskeptical treatment of the facts. Examples that come to mind for me are:

  • I have an eye disease called keratoconus. I noted a report some years ago on a local TV news station where they presented an amazing new form of contact lens that had given this lady back her sight essentially. When I did the research, it turned out this wasn't something that new, nor was it a miracle cure-all but simply one of several medical tools that might be used, and the report really provided a very narrow outlook.
  • The American news media is dominated by a few nightly news reports and the 24 hour cable news channels. Issues are frequently examined superficially, quotes are taken out of context, sometimes footage is misappropriated and essentially fabricated. When there are two sides of an argument rarely do the cable channels report both effectively. When there are not really two sides of an argument due to the preponderance of evidence on one side, often the nightly news channels manufacture or exaggerate the role of an 'alternative viewpoint' to generate conflict and/or appear to be reporting in a balanced way. When there are more than two viewpoints, only two usually are reported, perhaps due to time constraints.
  • Online news resources allow for voices to be heard that probably wouldn't make it onto mainstream news, but they're not immune to mixing bad with good reporting. For example Huffington Post, while having arguably good political reporting for the most part, is also known to mix in bunk with their health section.

So, what can or should be done to encourage more skeptical reporting? What's being done currently? Is there really a problem, or am I being a chicken little?

flag

2 Answers

2

The biggest problem is what gets the attention of the majority of the public. Gossip and supernatural is what gets their attention, hence views, hence sales. Science and conventional medicine is too similar to science and school which generally turns people away.

There have been numerous attempts to give science and medicine a similar PR push, one great example being Ida (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/05/090519-missing-link-found.html), however despite this getting a lot of media attention it didn't grab the public and the publicity push by it was rubbished by most skeptics and scientists, some claiming it being turned in to more of a loss than if they had just announced it in the usual way.

Personally I saw the PR push of it as good even if it was flawed as it at least got the news out there and people (generally) talking about it. More of this would be good imho. If people are at least talking about it (even dismissing it and pointing flaws in it) they are still talking about it and are more likely to take an interest in getting more accurate and scientific information.

link|flag
2

In the collection of skeptical advice and activism document called 'What Do I Do Next? Leading Skeptics Discuss 105 Practical Ways to Promote Science and Advance Skepticism', there's a few tips as to how skeptics can aid journalists towards producing accurate stories.

Some advice (this is from the handy-short version, not the extended) given includes:

Interact with Media

  • If a newspaper, radio show, or TV program makes a serious error or badly distorts the public understanding of science, write a concise, formal letter to the editor or producer. Reporters and editors work hard to ensure accuracy. If you write a letter to the editor, assume the reporter and editors acted in good faith — and then courteously tell them how their conclusions were mistaken.

  • If news media make a moderate error of fact or interpretation, write a short friendly letter directly to the actual reporter. Help the reporter get it right next time. Be on their side! Building a friendly relationship with the journalist may also help when it comes time to break a story or promote an event.

  • Start an “Ask a Skeptic” column in your local paper or newsletter. This is an easy and fun opportunity to reach a lot of people in your community.Be prepared to be flexible. Expect edits! Consider contributing to school newspapers, campus magazines, and street press publications.

link|flag
Nice, I especially like the "Ask a Skeptic" column idea. – Skrivener Jan 17 at 8:05

Your Answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.