On 24 October 2010 12:40, SlimVirgin <slimvirgin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
By excluding high-quality media sources you're
elevating the lowliest
scientist as a source, and the vested interests that finance the
research, above the most senior and experienced of disinterested
journalists. That makes no sense to me.
The specific case raised here, the BBC is, sadly, not a high quality
source for science reporting, being notoriously even worse than the
typical run of the media.
(Wonder if I could cite Ben Goldacre on that.)
Though their recent move to linking to original sources may help.
- d.