Friday, December 30, 2005
What nuttiness next? An official Republican position on infant baptism? Or maybe on superstring theory?
Green Goddess Gazette
In general, coverage of science in the U.S. press is pretty bad -- it's treated either as policy debate (as you document in the case of evolution) or as semi-amusing human interest sidebars if there's no controversy.
Economics coverage is as bad, although it gets more serious treatment -- but usually in the context of policy debate, or else forecasts (the weakest part of econ).
On his blog, Tom Palmer posted a photo of himself drawing a supply and demand diagram to explain price controls for a Kurdish journalist. She told him they'd print it in their paper. It's unconceivable that actual scientific arguments -- from econ or otherwise -- would appear in an American news medium. We're too geared to entertainment, sound bites, and ""information," as opposed to learning and understanding.