There’s something called false balance that happens in journalism, and it’s really something that’s only happened in the last generation of journalists. And there are a lot of factors in play, here. It’s not just this. But the idea that there is no objective truth that journalists must dig to get to and that their responsibility is fulfilled simply by presenting competing versions of the story and letting the audience decide which is true.
And what that does is that inappropriately weights our public discourse towards extreme views and furthers partisanship.
Shawn Otto (On Science Friday - Discussing the marginalization of science in politics)
J - False balance leads science journalists (or really “journalists covering science” since there are so few of the previous left) to assume that equal time equals equal merit. And even if they do not believe that, the viewpoint of the media consumer is that a crackpot that is given an equal platform to respected science is a crackpot that they should apparently listen to.
Source: thomasav
196 Notes/ Hide
-
maureenbarley reblogged this from thomasav
-
akkurtevdeneve liked this
-
grayovercast reblogged this from thomasav
-
a-fool-s-hope reblogged this from jtotheizzoe
-
ursadraconis reblogged this from jtotheizzoe
-
imh-hau reblogged this from readmyback
-
kiramorn reblogged this from stratifiedsquamousepithelium
-
stratifiedsquamousepithelium reblogged this from becomingestel
-
sisyphus-redeemed reblogged this from jtotheizzoe
