(Viewed 1,561 times)

[Chicago Astronomer - Astro Joe]

Hyperbole in Media Reports on Asteroids and Impacts

The following are segments of a story examining space rocks, the theories and their impact on Earth...

---------------

Many observers of the science press have noted an increasing tendency for both news releases and printed stories to exaggerate the uniqueness and significance of new research. The writer of a news release does this to increase the probability that the media will cover the story, and the media reporter will go along with this hyperbole or perhaps expand it further to get the story approved for publication by editors or other gatekeepers.

This is not intended as a general criticism of science reporting. There are many excellent science journalists who understand the issues and provide well-reasoned discussions of context for news stories. Overall, the reporting by science journalists of impact-related stories has been excellent. But a hyperbolic headline added without their knowledge can sometimes catch even the best writers.

Space science research dealing with impacts often makes a good story, especially when it is controversial. The public is likely to find science more interesting if they realize that research is carried out by real people working in a competitive environment. The controversy is very real in some cases, such as finding the cause (or causes) of the great PT mass extinction. In other cases, such as the KT mass extinction and the contemporary rate of impacts on Earth, a consensus exists based on multiple lines of evidence. While there are still many media-worthy stories, we should be skeptical of reports that the consensus has been overthrown by a single new result.



More here and the full story from the Committee for the Scientific investigation on paramormal claims: www.csicop.org/si/2005-03/asteroids.html

------------

It certainly takes the "Uumph" out of many accepted theories.

[Centaur]

Thanks for the info and link, Joe. Having worked in the news media for many years, I know full well how those wishing to publicize pet theories will take advantage of journalists desiring good stories that might tantalize the public. Even some supposedly good scientists and engineers are aware how the game is played, and do their best to manipulate the media to gain recognition. Some journalists gladly serve as their puppets, if it will stimulate interest from the audience. You yourself ran into this willingness of a portion of the media to hype a story when you were asked by Fox to comment on the potential for a specific asteroid impact.

I don't mean to imply that scientists and engineers are the worst of scoundrels. Actually, they're near the top of my credibility list. Televangelists are near the bottom. But they are all human and often do what seems necessary to advance their own careers.

Intelligent and well informed members of the public must first wear the hat of a skeptic. Ask yourself what flaws might exist in a new hypothesis, especially if it describes a situation that you were hoping is indeed true. The viability of a theory must be considered in doubt until it has run through the gauntlet of tests demanded by the scientific method. Even after a consensus of scientists accepts the new idea, over time parts of it may be pecked away, or it could be completely dismantled.

[Maddad]

I've noticed in science programs on TV that they will sometimes badly exaggerate to make something sound astounding or dangerous. I really like Leonard Nimoy, the actor who played Mr. Spock for so long, but his sensationalizing of some space-born danger (forgot what it was now *L*) really surprised me. The pressure to publicize would explain a lot.

[Chicago Astronomer - Astro Joe]

I totally agree with what you two say, but...

I don't mind discrete levels of hype and sensationalism, otherwise those not really into the subject become bored. It's almost like adult ADD. I think more hype should have come about in order to save the Hubble, and yes...the Fox interview was slanted, but it was fun and if it caused a person to look up from the day's drudgery, then that's cool!...

Now, I don't believe everything that I post in here, but it certainly makes for good conversation and might even offer a view other than is held onto so tightly. So I include stories like the missiles to destroy the asteroid recently and the like, as I enjoy the varied response. But I do believe life exists on Mars today...

If all news were presented in such a dry and to the point manner, it would probably become sooo boring that most lay people would just rather shut it out.

Have fun with the forum, I know I am!... ;D

[ddddyyyy]

I agree with Chicago Astronomer Joe

;D