Register for an account

X

Enter your name and email address below.

Your email address is used to log in and will not be shared or sold. Read our privacy policy.

X

Website access code

Enter your access code into the form field below.

If you are a Zinio, Nook, Kindle, Apple, or Google Play subscriber, you can enter your website access code to gain subscriber access. Your website access code is located in the upper right corner of the Table of Contents page of your digital edition.

Environment

Loves Me, Loves Me Not

Newsletter

Sign up for our email newsletter for the latest science news

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.

2 Free Articles Left

Want it all? Get unlimited access when you subscribe.

Subscribe

Already a subscriber? Register or Log In

Want unlimited access?

Subscribe today and save 70%

Subscribe

Already a subscriber? Register or Log In