Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang

II. Perspectives
7 deals with public trust in scientic
Chapter
is it about a scientic fact that gives
expertise—what
what extent should students, among other
To
be encouraged to disregard expert
individuals,
commonly cited example of false balance is the
A
about anthropogenic global warming,
“debate”
the scientific consensus has been
though
for at least two decades. Follow
overwhelming
terms: NASA Scientific
Search
Earth’s climate is
consensus:
the vast majority of experts—over 97%—
Though
global warming to human activity, the
attribute
3% have been given disproportionately
opposing
platforms, in the interest of balanced
large
This has left the public with an
journalism.
of inconclusive scientific debate
impression
though the scientific consensus is well
even
(Cook et al 2016).
established
example, coverage of global warming by
For
US newspapers—the New York Times,
leading
Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times and
the
Wall Street Journal (a group referred to
the
“the prestige press”)—between 1988 and
as
was found to overstate the case against
2002
“[t]he prestige press’s adherence
climatechange:
balance actually leads to biased coverage
to
both anthropogenic contributions to global
of
and resultant action” argued Boykoff
warming,
a review of the impartiality and
Following
of its science coverage, the BBC
accuracy
frequent comment received during this review is
A
elements of the BBC—particularly in the area of
that
and current aairs—does not fully understand
news
nature of scientic discourse and, as a result, is
the
guilty of ‘false impartiality’; of presenting the
often
of tiny and unqualied minorities as if they
views
the same weight as the scientic consensus.
have
approach has for some (but not all) topics
That
widespread. Conictual reporting of this
become
has the ability to distort public perception.
kind
arises in part because news and current aairs
It
who have to think on their feet in a
presenters,
interview, may have little insight into the topic
live
discussed and hence nd it more dicult to
being
balance than when dealing with politics,
establish
media or nance.
the
and genetically modified foods as
vaccinations
where impartial journalism understated the
cases
the journalistic profession shoulder all
Should
blame? It is not that simple. Consider the
this
in Box 2.3 that reports how fossil-fuel
article
groups began in the 1990s to target
industry
who portrayed global warming
reporters
a settled fact: “it was the perfect line of
as
because it played into a core maxim of
attack,
to be fair and balanced in presenting
journalism:
2
Making connections
Politics and science—what gives a fact credibility?
it authority, versus a claim by a politician?
opinion if it clashes with their own beliefs?
and Boykoff (2004).
similarly reported the following in 2011.
The BBC review cites global warming,
(BBC 2011)
the link to find out more.
scientific evidence and consensus.
warming
the contours of a debate” (Eshelman 2014). But
36