There’s a corollary: if you interview a scientist about research that has been published in peer reviewed journal, you don’t have to give equal time to the opposing side by looking under every rock to find one nut who disagrees.
Not every news story needs to be a debate
Edited to add: Lots of discussion below about the reliability of peer reviewed science and the need to question that as well. I’d never suggest that once published, science is “fact” Perhaps a better way to have stated my original point is that a journalist is responsible for evaluating the credibility of a story and if there are two sides presented they should be equally reliable.
Cometguy7 on February 13rd, 2021 at 12:40 UTC »
I'd do the weather report, and then quote them both. Let people know what's happening, and who's trying to deceive them.
25mookie92 on February 13rd, 2021 at 13:26 UTC »
"Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining"
jdith123 on February 13rd, 2021 at 14:11 UTC »
There’s a corollary: if you interview a scientist about research that has been published in peer reviewed journal, you don’t have to give equal time to the opposing side by looking under every rock to find one nut who disagrees.
Not every news story needs to be a debate
Edited to add: Lots of discussion below about the reliability of peer reviewed science and the need to question that as well. I’d never suggest that once published, science is “fact” Perhaps a better way to have stated my original point is that a journalist is responsible for evaluating the credibility of a story and if there are two sides presented they should be equally reliable.