Hi RM, this is Brea, who sent you the article in the first place. Even more frightening than the WaPo's spin is just how quickly we all went on the defensive. Think about just how wrong this country has gone that such a program would seem instantly plausible. We've got a guy on the FDA advisory panel for women's health whose proscription (typo intended) for PMS is prayer. Why wouldn't we believe this?
Exactly. And when you throw in South Dakota, FDA's stalling on Plan B, and assorted other misogynist delights, the WaPo spin on the CDC guidelines doesn't raise an eyebrow -- just blood pressure.
RM, this is one reason I cancelled my subscription to the WaPo recently. They've really bought into the whole notion that the country has turned hard right and they need to appease that crowd. Hasn't helped, of course, because all the wingers in the area read the Moonie owned Washington Times, so all they're doing is pissing of their real audience. The other thing is that a lot of times journalists just don't understand some of the subtleties of scientific studies, so intentionally or not, they tend to overstate the conclusions or break the study down to the lowest common denominator.
The other thing is that a lot of times journalists just don't understand some of the subtleties of scientific studies, so intentionally or not, they tend to overstate the conclusions or break the study down to the lowest common denominator.
This reminds me of a media boss I had who honestly thought the Mir space station was a giant mirror in space. Sadly not kidding.
RM, I had forgotten that you were/are a journalist, and I certainly didn't mean to lump all journalists together (any more than, as a lawyer, all lawyers can be lumped together). So my remark was a little insensitive, for which I apologize. I hope I didn't offend you.
Oh no, he did NOT think the space station was a mirror!! That's just too ridiculous.
Oh no, he did NOT think the space station was a mirror!! Oh yes, she did. Even wrote it on the rundown in the national computer system as "mirror" on multiple occasions.
And no, you didn't offend me. It's true that a great many journalists don't understand studies or statistics, and that affects the way they report on science.
Commenting by HaloScan
