12 December 2001
LATEST SIRCUS DEVELOPMENTS
"The spreading of unfounded anxieties, together with the generation of false optimism through talk of 'miracles' and 'breakthroughs', are entrenched media habits which may take some time to replace with more balanced and accurate coverage.'
Of course, the SIRC, like the Royal Society, has absolutely no problem with people hyping GM crops as miracles, saviours of the starving etc.
To set this in context see:
No. 10's press office and the Blairite Baroness
https://members.tripod.com/~ngin/091201a.htm
NB: "The published document - Guidelines on science and health communication - represents ***the strong consensus of the science and health communities in the United Kingdom."*** Now how did they guage that, we wonder, given that very few people know anything about this whole underhand affair?
For more on the SIRCus see: https://members.tripod.com/~ngin/scisale.htm
***
Social Issues Research Centre
Guidelines on Science and Health Communication
Latest developments
The Royal Society has now joined SIRC and the Royal Institution to produce a single set of guidelines on the reporting of science and health issues in the media. These replace the earlier SIRC / RI guidelines and the Royal Society's notes for journalists and editors.
The published document - Guidelines on science and health communication - represents the strong consensus of the science and health communities in the United Kingdom. They have also been formally endorsed by the Press Complaints Commission and fully debated in the House of Lords. [see PCC's "view" of the SIRC guidelines below]
The publication of a single document, of course, will not in itself lead to the eradication of the distortion and sensationalism which so often accompanies reporting of health and science issues. The spreading of unfounded anxieties, together with the generation of false optimism through talk of 'miracles' and 'breakthroughs', are entrenched media habits which may take some time to replace with more balanced and accurate coverage. At the same time we recognise that the sources of distortion and misrepresentation often lie within the science and health communities themselves and the manner in which they present their research to the public. It is for these reasons that a new charity has been established - The Health and Science Communication Trust (HCST).
The HSCT will be organising seminars and workshops to bring together reporters, broadcasters, doctors and scientists to discuss the issues in a non-confrontational manner. They will aim to give journalists a better understanding of the potentially harmful effects of inaccurate or unbalanced reporting of health and science issues. Equally, the seminars aim to provide those in the science and medical professions with a better understanding of the pressures faced by journalists and their requirements for the generation of 'interesting' stories.
The Guidelines themselves will be subject to revision in the light of comments received. HCST will take on the role of eliciting such feedback in early 2002 and an open forum will be established on the charity's web site. Until that time comments should be addressed to guidelines@sirc.org.
12.12.2001
To read or download the full guidelines
http://www.sirc.org/news/guidelines.shtml.
***
http://www.pcc.org.uk/2000/statistics_review.asp
Science reporting
Following a report from the House of Lords Select Committee on the issue of how science matters are reported in the media, the Commission held discussions on this subject with The Royal Society and the Social Issues Research Centre (SIRC). Following these discussions, SIRC produced a number of guidelines for newspapers and practitioners about this matter, which were welcomed at the time of their publication by Lord Wakeham. He said: "Central to the newspaper and magazine Code of Practice is the issue of accuracy in reporting. Under that Code, publications must take care to be accurate - and also ensure they differentiate clearly between comment, conjecture and fact. The publication of SIRC's Guidelines underlines the importance of those rules in regard to reporting of scientific and medical stories. I welcome them as a constructive and positive contribution in this crucial area."