Via the Other McCain. A not heretofore known instance of trickery in advancing an agenda, the BBC decides that they will only present one side of the debate, since, their words, the science (and therefore debate) is settled. And why not? After all, 100 years of pressing the Robin Hood ideals until it just about collapses societies didn't bring on the Socialist Millenium, spurious scientific claims should, as long as they don't include alternative opinions.
Mark Steyn was right: Stalinists wished they had the pliant press our fascist overlords have. They could have avoided the stigma of arresting writers and smashing printing presses. Instead, printing handouts and calling it journalism is the order of the day.
BBC journalists are being sent on courses to stop them inviting so many cranks onto programmes to air 'marginal views'
The BBC Trust on Thursday published a progress report into the corporation's science coverage which was criticised in 2012 for giving too much air-time to critics who oppose non-contentious issues.
The report found that there was still an 'over-rigid application of editorial guidelines on impartiality' which sought to give the 'other side' of the argument, even if that viewpoint was widely dismissed.
Some 200 staff have already attended seminars and workshops and more will be invited on courses in the coming months to stop them giving 'undue attention to marginal opinion.'
"The Trust wishes to emphasise the importance of attempting to establish where the weight of scientific agreement may be found and make that clear to audiences," wrote the report authors. |
