3 ms·
Ah, the messy intersection of politics, journalism, and science. It looks (from one side) like an example of journalism constructing a narrative and suppressing
by inimino 10y ago
Ah, the messy intersection of politics, journalism, and science. It looks (from one side) like an example of journalism constructing a narrative and suppressing evidence that doesn't fit. Obviously this doesn't help the cause beyond the short term.
- wpietri 10y agoI think that's too simple a reading. There is a whole industry of people whose job it is to create doubt about science so as to prevent action that might harm those who pay them. It started with decades of denial that cigarettes could possibly cause harm, but went from there: https://www.amazon.com/Doubt-Their-Product-Industrys-Threatens/dp/019530067X https://www.amazon.com/Doubt-Their-Product-Industrys-Threate... I'm glad that a guy with a political science degree is interested in scientific topics. But I think he'd be a little more sensitive to the broader problem of non-experts jumping in to an area that has become highly politicized, and where industry has such a strong short-term incentive to undermine the appearance of scientific consensus.
- WillPostForFood 10y agoYou are totally right, and bad science should be vigorously debunked. But that doesn't justify the suppression of dissenting views. Science isn't static, there needs to be free debate.