Home Page Link AgBioWorld Home Page
About AgBioWorld Donations Ag-Biotech News Declaration Supporting Agricultural Biotechnology Ag-biotech Info Experts on Agricultural Biotechnology Contact Links Subscribe to AgBioView Home Page

AgBioView Archives

A daily collection of news and commentaries on
ag-biotech.


Subscribe AgBioView Subscribe

Search AgBioWorld Search

AgBioView Archives

Subscribe

 


SEARCH:     

Date:

March 22, 2000

Subject:

British Journalism

 

- http://www.agbioworld.org, http://agbioview.listbot.com


The Royal Institution and the House of Lords science and technology
committee are recommending that science journalism in Britain should improve
itself (see AgBioView posting by Andrew Abel,and AgBiotech Reporter
(http://www.bioreporter.com 22/03/2000).

One general observation: it will be hard to make news-hungry news editors
take their science specialist, or science, seriously. They live on an
altogether more brutal planet.

One specific observation: under "balance" it is recommended that reporters
seek the majority view amongst scientists. Well, yes, point taken. Reporters
should seek to know and understand and not discount the majority position.

But science quite often proceeds by the insights of unpopular,
counter-intuitive, maverick loners. These are, naturally, great copy. And
sometimes they are right too.

A further general observation. The glory of British journalism is,
contradictorily, that it is simultaneously incredibly bad and incredibly
good. Making it more even, like much US journalism, risks dousing its
eccentric flame.

Richard D North
www.richarddnorth.com
Author, Life on a modern planet: A manifesto for progress (Manchester
University Press, 1995)