3 ms·
What kind of journalism is this? First, The Guardian uses statements from a no-name group "US Right-To-Know" instead of doing fact-finding themselves. Fact-fin
by smarx007 3y ago
What kind of journalism is this?
First, The Guardian uses statements from a no-name group "US Right-To-Know" instead of doing fact-finding themselves. Fact-finding is what good journalism is all about.
Second, it is quite bold to assume that any academic who produced a joint industrial-academic report is corrupt. Setting aside the borderline irresponsible generalisation, many universities set strict conditions for such cooperation. The most prominent is a condition not to be paid or remunerated in any other way for the joint work. The Guardian did not even try to check if any remuneration took place.
This makes it impossible for me to form an opinion about the article contents.
- wkat4242 3y agoIndeed the sourcing is weird. The Guardian is not what it used to be.
- carlosbaraza 3y agoIndeed, I just stopped reading half way through, because it's extremely low quality journalism. A conflict of interest doesn't mean full blown corruption, they might still have done the right thing with a conflict of interest. That's the job of the journalist, to properly dig in and find evidence for their case. Instead they just introduced more noise to an already noisy topic full of controversy.