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.
. . . .
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
