It's no secret I hold our media estate in low esteem.
Especially on matters of science at the best of times, but even more so when agendas then get bolted on top of near zero appreciation of facts, what is know, or what is not, to support prejudices.
This highlights the point:
http://climatedenial.org/2010/12/02/one-report-two-headlines/
Two diametrically opposing news media; two diametrically opposing ways at looking at things.
It looks like a debate is brewing that may be worth the follow.
I have to agree that I'd rely on the Daily Mail for very little, but it does have its uses.
The Guardian is more credible, but can also be prone to seeing things through its own prism.
And the Met Office's record is not one I would hang my hat on to justify a story.
No comments:
Post a Comment