One of the trickiest issues in science journalism is how to make
sense of scientific disagreements. A notorious problem is false
balance: equal time for undeserving claims on questions such as
climate change and the autism-vaccine
connection. General-interest media such as newspapers and TV
news are especially prone to this syndrome, but even more
specialized media such as Scientific American struggle with how
to weigh competing claims. I'll offer some remarks and then open
it up for general discussion. I'm interested in your thoughts
and advice for how we journalists might do better.
Begin Flash full motion video, or Flash lower bandwidth video. (Or, right-click to download the 3gp file.)
Begin QuickTime full motion movie or Quicktime lower bandwidth movie.
(Or, right-click to download the lower bandwidth movie.) (Or, right-click to download the podcast.)
Begin streaming RealMedia. (Or, right-click to download the audio file.)
To begin viewing slides, click on the first slide below. (Or, view as pdf.)
Author entry (protected)