On bad science reporting
September 8th, 2005
Ben Goldacre, who writes the unmissable Bad Science column in The Guardian, has let his blood boil to the point where he writes a wonderful, lengthy diatribe against typical media coverage of science.
Science is done by scientists, who write it up. Then a press release is written by a non-scientist, who runs it by their non-scientist boss, who then sends it to journalists without a science education who try to convey difficult new ideas to an audience of either lay people, or more likely - since they’ll be the ones interested in reading the stuff - people who know their way around a t-test a lot better than any of these intermediaries. Finally, it’s edited by a whole team of people who don’t understand it. You can be sure that at least one person in any given “science communication” chain is just juggling words about on a page, without having the first clue what they mean, pretending they’ve got a proper job, their pens all lined up neatly on the desk.
There’s more, much more, all worth poring over.
September 9th, 2005 at 5:00 am
Finance is done by financial people. Then a press release is written by a non-financier, who runs it by their non-financier boss, who then sends it to journalists without a finance education who try to convey difficult new ideas to an audience of either lay people, or more likely - since they’ll be the ones interested in reading the stuff - people who know their way around a put option a lot better than any of these intermediaries. Finally, it’s edited by a whole team of people who don’t understand it. You can be sure that at least one person in any given “finance communication� chain is just juggling words about on a page, without having the first clue what they mean, pretending they’ve got a proper job, their pens all lined up neatly on the desk.
Or, more generally:
[Foo] is done by [Foo experts], who write it up. Then a press release is written by a non-[Foo expert], who runs it by their non-[Foo expert] boss, who then sends it to journalists without a [Foo] education who try to convey difficult new ideas to an audience of either lay people, or more likely - since they’ll be the ones interested in reading the stuff - people who know their way around a [Foo jargon term] a lot better than any of these intermediaries. Finally, it’s edited by a whole team of people who don’t understand it. You can be sure that at least one person in any given “[Foo] communication� chain is just juggling words about on a page, without having the first clue what they mean, pretending they’ve got a proper job, their pens all lined up neatly on the desk.
And the point is, exactly?
September 9th, 2005 at 5:02 am
“Your comment is awaiting moderation.”
Please do not moderate my comment. It was intemperate by choice. Making it moderate removes any purpose in posting it.