The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.
More than 100 Nobel Prize-winners have signed onto a campaign demanding activist groups and their seemingly willing accomplices in the press refrain from spreading misinformation about the science behind genetically modified foods.
“The media very often likes to present a supposedly balanced argument,” Sir Richard Roberts, who is spearheading the campaign along with fellow Nobel Prize-winner Philip Sharp, told the Washington Examiner. . .
“They present it as though it’s a 50/50 deal, rather than the fact that it’s a 99-to-1 percent. . . . They just have to do a better job of estimating where is the consensus and if you want to bring another view in, you have to point out it’s a minority view,” he added.
Roberts. . . explained the purpose of the campaign is to demand activists and media report accurately and fairly on GMOs.
. . . .
Related on the SLP
The former president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science echoed these sentiments.
Junk science in media is “a huge problem,” Nina Fedoroff told the Examiner . . . .
. . . .
Luckily, she said, there are websites that provide “expertise and analysis” on scientific research, including Academics Review and Genetic Literacy Project. . . .
Read full, original post: GMOs showcase how poorly journalists cover science issues
