Comments:Australian Greens leader criticises media ethics

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

Dr. Bob Brown is right.

People of influence are actually standing up against the B.S. that is put forth as news these days! Where are guys like these in the U.S.?

Tbf it's news everywhere. Some is better than others but at the end of the day it's a business, they adopt a political stance so they can corner the market for either 'biggots' or 'liberalists' depending on ur viewpoint. This is especially true of newspapers which have to continually attempt to justify themsleves in a digital age. The bbc is probably the least affected since it does not need to satisfy an audience to get paid since it's funded by UK licence payers. On the subject of science in the media I agree with the guy - statistics are misrepresented all the time and they'll have a full blown story based on one scientific paper they have seen and make it appear as though this has revolutionised the scientific l;andscape when in fact one single study rarely does this. They are the only easy outlet for such stories though - scientific literature tends not to be free so it's not as if there are many alternatives. Even a mag like NewScientist cost much more than a newspaper so an interested layman is more likely to buy the cheap and more easiliy available newspaper