We'll be exploring the content and consequences of ABC's new editorial policies over the coming months. Of interest is the new guidance on balance in section 4 that includes the following statement:
"ABC is guided by these hallmarks of impartiality: • a balance that follows the weight of evidence."
Based on this can we now expect ABC to dump its continued support of Tim Flannery's debunked Blitzkrieg theory of megafaunal extinction? Or will this piece of popular fiction be further defended against the tidal wave of scientific evidence.
Does an emphasis on "evidence" mean our missing stories on climate change will be covered? The editorial standard expressed in section 4.5 "Do not unduly favour one perspective over another." seems to suggest a wave of those missing stories are about to be unleashed.
We shall wait and see.
The weight of evidence clause is of course to be used in conjunction with their ex cathedra pronouncements of what the evidence is- ie blanket acceptance of IPCC statements etc.
ReplyDelete