There's a brilliant blog/newsletter called 'Bad Science' (I think I've blogged on it before).
Well worth subscribing to.
The most recent topic, How To Read A Paper - For Journalists, at last got me to write in:
"A great Idea.
I know your primary area of interest is health, but I'd like to pop in a request for environmental issues, because I think the public are particularly poorly served by objective analysis with these in making informed decisions. All to often it's just a straight serve of a press release or a deliberate use of the latest 'research' as an excuse for a dramatic headline.
You'll find me screaming at the TV when a vanilla or a bouffant with a microphone standing next to an electric car cheerfully announces that it 'has no emissions'. No, they simply come out of another pipe, and actually I'd like to know what the losses are getting from the generator to the motor, environmentally speaking.
As to climate change/global warming, well, it's been said over and over again, but to most ordinary folk it's just a load of contradictory hot air: artillery exchanges over our heads in no person's land, leaving us none the wiser on what to do for the best.
Me, I simply think it's a shame to waste. And to a lot of editors I'd say it's also a waste to shame: get positive and proactive! It's not as easy writing an upbeat headline, but there's enough out there that will capture folks' attentions, as I truly believe they are dying for solutions and things to 'do', and not be fed constantly on a diet of things you can't."
No comments:
Post a Comment