Last week, two tireless bloggers who are often highly critical of the media had opposite reactions to ABC, one of the major broadcast networks in the U.S. Joe Romm praised this segment on the recent floods in Australia and Brazil as
one of the best climate change stories ever to appear on a major network's evening news show.
Meanwhile, Orac panned ABC's morning news show for its decision to interview anti-vaccine crusader Andrew Wakefield, the subject of a recent devastating investigative report. According to Orac, this was yet another sorry example of
fallacious "tell both sides" journalism...
Can anyone tell me why these respective pronouncements of GOOD ABC (Romm) and BAD ABC (Orac) are wrong? Extra bonus points for which ABC segment got the story right and why.
