There is no problem with assertions of experts or interested parties being reported by the press. But there is a problem when such assertions are clearly opinion or belief and yet are reported as fact, or most often, as a prediction of the future that will definitely come to pass.
Members of the press love to write stories with assertions which agree with their personal bias from those they deem credible and present such as if the assertions were the consensus of the whole universe of knowledgeable people. However when forced to provide an illusion of balance, reporters often present the assertions of others with whom they disagree as being of less value or as of a tiny minority and thus not deserving of respect.
We see this daily in almost all political news and especially in news regarding the earth’s climate. Assertions from those whose climate models have been consistently wrong are treated as if their asserted predictions are not only reasonable but correct. Whereas those who take a differing or simply more cautious view are treated as outsider kooks even when they hold equal or superior credentials. This is dogmatic and anti-rational and it is as prevalent as cold in winter.
It was just a few years ago that the “global warming” crowd was telling us that winters were going to become so mild that ice at the poles would melt in such significant quantities to drastically raise sea levels. When such predictions became laughable with record cold winters in many places, they simply changed their banner to “climate change” and their story to say that such man-made change would increase the severity of swings in weather.
Never forget that being a moving target of argument is a central tool of the false fearmonger pushing an apocalyptic agenda.
Fearmongers often are moving targets of argument
Robert Pratt
There is no problem with assertions of experts or interested parties being reported by the press. But there is a problem when such assertions are clearly opinion or belief and yet are reported as fact, or most often, as a prediction of the future that will definitely come to pass.
Members of the press love to write stories with assertions which agree with their personal bias from those they deem credible and present such as if the assertions were the consensus of the whole universe of knowledgeable people. However when forced to provide an illusion of balance, reporters often present the assertions of others with whom they disagree as being of less value or as of a tiny minority and thus not deserving of respect.
We see this daily in almost all political news and especially in news regarding the earth’s climate. Assertions from those whose climate models have been consistently wrong are treated as if their asserted predictions are not only reasonable but correct. Whereas those who take a differing or simply more cautious view are treated as outsider kooks even when they hold equal or superior credentials. This is dogmatic and anti-rational and it is as prevalent as cold in winter.
It was just a few years ago that the “global warming” crowd was telling us that winters were going to become so mild that ice at the poles would melt in such significant quantities to drastically raise sea levels. When such predictions became laughable with record cold winters in many places, they simply changed their banner to “climate change” and their story to say that such man-made change would increase the severity of swings in weather.
Never forget that being a moving target of argument is a central tool of the false fearmonger pushing an apocalyptic agenda.