Originally posted by C Elegans
That would indeed be sad.
I'm sure you know without my saying anything, @CE, that many of us are opposed to such practices, and regard 'em as nonsense.
The BBC, alas, has long since gone the way of other major news sources in realizing that good, hard science is a bore to the average listener; and the BBC wants to be less elitist, and have a larger popularity among the average radio audience. Newshour on the World Service is one of the worst offenders in this regard, IMO, for the way they try to reduce many huge, complex issues to simple yes/no statements, and the way they twist minor scientific footnotes into banner headlines without a factual basis.
I'd also mention that during the 9/11 crisis, my wife and I were renting rooms in Budapest. We watched the 24-hour BBC news serivce on television, and saw how the Beeb chose its sources to present a *highly* prejudiced, one-sided view of what life was like in NYC. I've seen this before, too: when a few of the Kennedy family died in a plane crash a year or two ago, the BBC claimed for a day (while the funeral took place) that "America was in morning, its First Family torn to pieces")--while most of America could have cared less, nobody outside of Massachusetts even lowering a flag; and as for the "First Family"...I'm no fan of George W, but the acting president's family fits that bill, not the Kennedy's. The BBC has plenty of opinions to mix in with their news.
In my opinion.
