A bit of journalistic irony. Last week I groused that a new paper on methane from plants was getting very little attention in the press, despite the fact that it refutes a 2006 paper published in Nature that got lots of press. I wished aloud that the situation would be set right. Well, five days later, a few more sites have published the press release, but I've only seen one new piece of original reporting.
It appears in the news section of today's issue of Nature. Hats off to Nature for making room for some uncomfortable news.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Joel Achenbach of the Achenblog at the Washington Post is worried about science press releases:
Eight is Enough: Achenblog
Question Scientific Authority
The latter is about our press release on a paper that came out in Science last friday.
Here is the original primary press release on EurekAlert.…
I haven't had a chance to read the original paper - I'm getting ready to head out of town and probably won't get to it until next week, but I just got a press release from U Alaska Fairbanks about a recent paper in this month's issue of Science that suggests that we've got bigger methane problems…
Some guy named Mulshine, who is apparently an ancient journalist (remember: generation is mindset, not age), penned one of those idiotic pieces for Wall Street Journal, willingly exposing his out-datedness and blindness to the world - read it yourself and chuckle: All I Wanted for Christmas Was a…
You know I have been following the "death of newspapers" debate, as well as "bloggers vs. journalists" debate, and "do we need science reporters" debate for a long time now. What I have found - and it is frustrating to watch - is that different people use different definitions for the same set of…
Well, we all know how quickly media picks up on Nature articles...
PS. Glenn Beck tonight appears to make the argument that research like this one is only done by Marxists with aspirations for UN controlled one-world government. Yeah, that old bag. As much as there has been talk about framing evolutionary talk, this rejection of science due to an assumption of global conspiracy requires some serious rethinking along the same lines.
The fact that Glenn Beck is arguing about global warming absolutely kills me. Not only does he not know what he's talking about, he's arguing about a facet of the debate which has absolutely no bearing on the outcome.
The link attached to "It appears in the news section of today's issue of Nature." leads to a registration page. Apparently, Carl has a subscription to Nature. Those of us who don't can't read what this uncomfortable news is all about.
Sorry about that, BC. If it's any consolation, Oliver Morton blogs on all this over at Nature's new climate blog.