How false balance confuses readers

Reporters often struggle with how to handle dissenting views on subjects where the science is settled, such as climate change or vaccinations. Should the opposing viewpoints be included with an explanation that they aren't considered valid? Maybe not, a blog post by Matt Shipman suggests. Summarizing recent research, Shipman writes that "introducing a second viewpoint makes the first scientist seem less credible – even if the second viewpoint is clearly discredited."

April 14, 2015

ADVERTISEMENT
BWF Climate Change and Human Health Seed Grants

ADVERTISEMENT
Eric and Wendy Schmidt Awards for Excellence in Science Communications

ADVERTISEMENT
EurekAlert! Travel Awards