Finally, some end to our agony!

Scientists several times complain about dodgy press releases of their research work. I myself have protested against some journalists' shoddy work  (1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ) while reporting research news. Media simply doesn't care about the misconceptions they are creating and spreading while reporting about scientific research.  Even when I complained to the news papers here, they simply ignored my objections  and went about their work gleefully. And journalists call themselves 'very responsible people'. Huh!

With other areas of journalism, news papers/magazines/online news portals can depend on news agencies, press releases, dubious websites and people who make statements like politicians, sports-persons, movie/pop stars. But with regard to science journalism, they should consult the original peer reviewed research papers published in standard science journals that follow the rules and methodologies of science. They can go to the scientists for explanations. They cannot follow the same methods they use for other areas of journalism here (8) if they really care about authenticity and real facts.

A number of times I have felt both helpless and irritated when I read in the press the reports I have discarded as rubbish. When news sites, social networks report my discards confusing people, I protested too. The problem is most editors,  journalists, moderators and administrators don't know which ones are genuine and which ones are fake and doctored. And they don't ask the experts. They trust 'foreign' news agencies, websites run by not people of science but by journalists because they are exclusively 'science based' ones. Just because you add science to your title it doesn't become science! 'Science' has some rules to follow and majority of the journalists don't know the difference between genuine science that follow these rules and pseudo-science that doesn't. And they don't realize just because they report junk science, they don't become a  science-friendly media outlet. In fact they are causing more harm to the public with their irresponsible reports.

And authentic  research will be lost most of the time in translation. Twists, turns, extra junk matter,  misinterpretations, papers published in dubious journals - not genuine ones - are what journalists are mostly presenting in their science stories. And we get distressed and annoyed whenever we read them in papers/magazines here. 'Isn't there an end to our misery?' is the Q we asked ourselves several times.

Now, we found an interesting site that somewhat puts an end to our anguish at least with regard to health care research. One of our fellow science communicators brought to our notice about this one (thanks, Kirk, for this wonderful news) : health news/story release reviews site which conducts independent expert reviews of ‘health care journalism, advertising, marketing, public relations and other messages that may influence consumers and provides criteria that consumers can use to evaluate these messages themselves.’ It also rates press releases from universities, government agencies, medical journals, drug makers, device manufacturers and others. In Kirk's words, it actually polices the research press releases! Wow!

Have a look at their work here:

http://www.healthnewsreview.org/

Story reviews: http://www.healthnewsreview.org/reviews/

News release reviews: http://www.healthnewsreview.org/news-release-reviews/

I have read some of their reviews and loved them. A few days back I have read in the news papers here an article with this head line:  “Fasting may reduce breast cancer risk”. Need I say, people who read this one would believe it and go for fasting? And when they realize there wouldn't be any benefits actually, they lose trust in science and scientists. This is because  the research was misinterpreted by the press.

Now read the review of this research  news  here and how the misconstruction has happened. Journalists, if you really have a clear conscience, it would definitely attack you now!

Need I say the news about this site put a smile on my face? But let me see how many journalists will take the constructive criticism this site offers seriously and rectify their mistakes. They will do it if they are really responsible like they say they are!

References:

1. http://kkartlab.in/group/some-science/forum/topics/how-jurnalists-t...

2. http://kkartlab.in/group/some-science/forum/topics/why-is-science-j...

3.http://kkartlab.in/group/some-science/forum/topics/shooting-the-mes...

4. http://kkartlab.in/group/some-science/forum/topics/my-reply-to-a-me...

5. http://kkartlab.in/group/some-science/forum/topics/science-s-meta-a...

6. http://kkartlab.in/group/some-science/forum/topics/why-journalists-...

7. http://kkartlab.in/group/some-science/forum/topics/are-these-invent...

8. http://kkartlab.in/group/some-science/forum/topics/why-is-science-j...