An eye on ABC NEWS: Keeping the bastards who keep the bastards honest - honest.
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label science. Show all posts
Thursday, January 11, 2018
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Update: Science literacy: ABC's Doh Doh Doh
Seems ABC agree that that confusing 3 out of 10 with 1 in 3 is an embarrassing mistake to make in a story about science literacy. (Our original post HERE).
Reply received 2 September 2010
I refer to your email of 30 July 2010 regarding a caption accompanying the News Online item ‘Science literacy at risk of extinction’, published the same day.
You are of course correct that the values ‘3 in 10’ and ‘one third’ are not equivalent. ABC News have explained that picture captions, like headlines, try to capture the essence of a story in just a few words, and this is what occurred in this instance. While we don’t believe it to be a significant error, in view of the story’s focus on scientific literacy, ABC News have decided to amend the caption to read ‘Nearly a third of people surveyed believed humans walked the Earth with dinosaurs’.
Yours sincerely,
Head, Audience and Consumer Affairs
Score +1
Reply received 2 September 2010
I refer to your email of 30 July 2010 regarding a caption accompanying the News Online item ‘Science literacy at risk of extinction’, published the same day.
You are of course correct that the values ‘3 in 10’ and ‘one third’ are not equivalent. ABC News have explained that picture captions, like headlines, try to capture the essence of a story in just a few words, and this is what occurred in this instance. While we don’t believe it to be a significant error, in view of the story’s focus on scientific literacy, ABC News have decided to amend the caption to read ‘Nearly a third of people surveyed believed humans walked the Earth with dinosaurs’.
Yours sincerely,
Head, Audience and Consumer Affairs
Score +1
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Science literacy: ABC's Doh Doh Doh
Doh Doh Doh
ABC's report "Science literacy at risk of extinction" covers the results of a survey of science literacy in Australia based on responses to a number of science questions. Looking at the missing science news stories listed below it seems ABC has not been doing the cause of empiricism* any favours. It even confuses "3 out of 10" with "1 out of 3" - close but no cigar. An embarrassing mistake to make in a story about science literacy.Update: see ABC reply below
The questions and some of the comments from the survey appear below. The complete survey results can be found HERE.
Q1: How long does it take for the Earth to go around the Sun?
(Men, younger people, and those with higher education levels were more likely to know the correct answer)
Q2: Is the following statement true or false? The earliest humans lived at the same time as dinosaurs.
(Australians aged 45-64 years and people with less education are the most likely to think that humans lived during the time of the dinosaurs)
Q3: What percentage of the Earth’s surface is covered by water?
(People with a university education were more likely to say the percentage of the Earth’s surface covered with water is 70%.)
Q4: What percentage of the Earth’s water is fresh water?
(Men are more likely to think that the percentage of fresh water on Earth is 3% (16% versus 9% of women), as are those with a university education (17% compared with 12% or fewer of people with less education). The small number of correct answers suggest that most Australians do not know how much of the Earth’s water is fresh.)
Q5: Do you think that evolution is occurring?
(Men, people aged 18-24 years and people with higher education levels are more likely to think that evolution is occurring. )
Q6: Do you think that humans are influencing the evolution of other species?
(Most Australians, regardless of gender, age or education level believe that humans are influencing the evolution of other species,)
Q7: In your opinion, how important is science education to the Australian economy?
(Australians view science education as important for the economy, but men, people aged over 65 years and people with university qualifications are more likely to think that science education is absolutely essential.)
The survey summary states:
Whilst the majority of Australians disagreed, three in ten people said that they believe the earliest humans coexisted with the dinosaurs.
Nevertheless, the results of this survey show that most Australians are aware of many basic scientific facts. For example:
- Around two thirds (61%) know it takes one year for the Earth to travel around the Sun;
- Around seven in ten (71%) believe evolution is currently occurring;
- Around three quarters (77%) believe humans are influencing the evolution of other species; and
- Around three quarters (74%) think that between 70% and 80% of the Earth’s surface is covered in water.
However, around three quarters of Australians overestimate the proportion of the Earth’s water that is fresh, with 77% of respondents believing the proportion is 4% or more.
Younger Australians, those with higher levels of education, and men where somewhat more likely to answer each of the questions correctly.
Results also show that most respondents believe that science education is “absolutely essential” (42%) or “very important” (38%) to the Australian economy.
In particular, people aged over 65 years were likely to emphasize the value of science education, with one in two (50%) stating that it is “absolutely essential” for the Australian economy.
ABC's missing stories
Missing News: Nothing "unprecedented" in melting ice
Missing News: Climate models are an each way bet
Missing News: Oxburgh Inquiry-science was not the subject of our study
Missing News: Where's Watts Up With That
Missing News: Palaeoproterozoic fossils push back the age for multicellular life.
Missing News: Urban Heat Island effect at Laverton, VICTORIA
Missing News: Butterfly claims debunked
More missing news: No depth to ABC coverage of Oxburgh Report
Missing News - Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation accounts for changes in Swiss Glaciers
Missing News on Polar Bears
Missing News - Royal Society to revise climate message
Missing news: GLOBAL WARMING ADVOCACY SCIENCE: A CROSS EXAMINATION
Missing News: Cretaceous Extinctions: Evidence Overlooked
ABC miss the scoop for the poop
Missing News: ABC receives Gold Walkley for climate change reporting
Missing News - Study falsifies IPCC: Climate has low sensitivity to CO2
Missing News: More Curry for IPCC
Missing News: Homeopathy-no effects beyond placebo
Missing News: Wind contributing to Arctic sea ice loss, study finds
Missing News: Wong 'fully duped" according to climate researcher
More missing News: World may not be warming
Missing News: Censorship at AGU: scientists denied the right of reply
Missing News: Medieval Warm Period similar to Modern Warm Period
Missing News: No change in Global Tropical storm days due to Global Warming - Report
More missing news: UAE accused of misleading UK Parliament
Jones' BBC Interview missing in action-reports no warming since 1995
(*Empiricism in the philosophy of science emphasizes those aspects of scientific knowledge that are closely related to evidence, especially as discovered in experiments. It is a fundamental part of the scientific method that all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world, rather than resting solely ona priori reasoning, intuition, or revelation. Hence, science is considered to be methodologically empirical in nature....via wikipedia)
ABC reply received 2 September, 2010
I refer to your email of 30 July 2010 regarding a caption accompanying the News Online item ‘Science literacy at risk of extinction’, published the same day.
You are of course correct that the values ‘3 in 10’ and ‘one third’ are not equivalent. ABC News have explained that picture captions, like headlines, try to capture the essence of a story in just a few words, and this is what occurred in this instance. While we don’t believe it to be a significant error, in view of the story’s focus on scientific literacy, ABC News have decided to amend the caption to read ‘Nearly a third of people surveyed believed humans walked the Earth with dinosaurs’.
Yours sincerely,
Head, Audience and Consumer Affairs
SCORE +1
Saturday, May 1, 2010
From the vault - next time ask a geologist
Catalyst - 16 August 2007
The complaint
A viewer complained about a Catalyst story which dealt with the discovery of the Tiktaalik fossil on Ellesmere Island. The report made references to "a time [400 million years ago] when all living creatures lived and breathed in water", and references to the air above water being "poison" and "toxic" at the time. The complainant pointed out that there were living creatures on land in the Early Devonian period and also noted that the air was not “toxic” at the time.
Findings
The ABC acknowledged that the two aspects of the story noted by the complainant were inaccurate. Catalyst should have referred to "all limbed vertebrates" rather than "all creatures" and references to “toxic” air should not have been included in the program. A correction was added to the transcript of the story on the Catalyst website. A complaint handling breach was also recorded as the complainant did not receive a response within the statutory 60 day period.
"From the Vault" - digging up past corrections and clarifications from the ABC archives.
The complaint
A viewer complained about a Catalyst story which dealt with the discovery of the Tiktaalik fossil on Ellesmere Island. The report made references to "a time [400 million years ago] when all living creatures lived and breathed in water", and references to the air above water being "poison" and "toxic" at the time. The complainant pointed out that there were living creatures on land in the Early Devonian period and also noted that the air was not “toxic” at the time.
Findings
The ABC acknowledged that the two aspects of the story noted by the complainant were inaccurate. Catalyst should have referred to "all limbed vertebrates" rather than "all creatures" and references to “toxic” air should not have been included in the program. A correction was added to the transcript of the story on the Catalyst website. A complaint handling breach was also recorded as the complainant did not receive a response within the statutory 60 day period.
"From the Vault" - digging up past corrections and clarifications from the ABC archives.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
From the vault - who failed astronomy 101
7pm Television News 8 June 2006
The complaint
A viewer complained that Jupiter was referred to as a star instead of a planet.
Findings
The ABC acknowledged the error.
http://www.abc.net.au/corp/pubs/documents/public_report_apr_jun_2006.pdf
Behind the News 24 October 2006
The complaint
A viewer pointed out that a segment on Mars had included inaccurate statements about the
planet’s distance from Earth.
Findings
The ABC acknowledged the error and corrected the information on the program’s website.
http://www.abc.net.au/corp/pubs/documents/public_report_oct_dec_2006.pdf
"From the Vault" - digging up past corrections and clarifications from the ABC archives.
The complaint
A viewer complained that Jupiter was referred to as a star instead of a planet.
Findings
The ABC acknowledged the error.
http://www.abc.net.au/corp/pubs/documents/public_report_apr_jun_2006.pdf
Behind the News 24 October 2006
The complaint
A viewer pointed out that a segment on Mars had included inaccurate statements about the
planet’s distance from Earth.
Findings
The ABC acknowledged the error and corrected the information on the program’s website.
http://www.abc.net.au/corp/pubs/documents/public_report_oct_dec_2006.pdf
"From the Vault" - digging up past corrections and clarifications from the ABC archives.
Monday, March 8, 2010
Nature says "Asili", ABC says "Mwamba" - jambo ambalo si kweli
Update 23/3/2010-see outcome below
ABC HEADLINE: "Scientists discover ancient dinosaur ancestor" Posted Online news 5 March 2010
ABC REPORTED: An un-authored report covers the recent discovery of a dinosaur-like creature that roamed Earth at least 10 million years earlier than the oldest known dinosaur. The discovery was reported in Nature HERE.
The ABC report concludes: "The names asilisaurus kongwe comes from "asili," which means "founder" in Swahili, "sauros", the Greek for "lizard", and "kongwe," Swahili for "ancient".
THE COMPLAINT: As stated in the actual article the etymology of the name is derived thus "Etymology. From asili, Swahili for ancestor or foundation, and sauros, Greek for lizard; kongwe, Swahili for ancient.
The online Swahili - English translator (http://africanlanguages.com/swahili/) indicates the Swahili word for founder is "Mwamba". Clearly the dinosaur is named "Asilisaurus kongwe" and not "mwambasaurus kongwe".
Please correct the report to include the etymology stated in the original Nature article.
ABC ED POL 5.2.2 Accuracy
OUTCOME: Thank you for your emails of 6 and 8 March, regarding the ABC News online report Scientists discover ancient dinosaur ancestor.
Your concerns have been investigated by Audience and Consumer Affairs, a unit which is separate to and independent of program making areas within the ABC. We have reviewed the broadcast, assessed it against the ABC’s editorial standards and sought and considered material provided by ABC News.
COMMENT: Nature says "asili", ABC says "Mwamba" - jambo ambalo si kweli
ABC HEADLINE: "Scientists discover ancient dinosaur ancestor" Posted Online news 5 March 2010
ABC REPORTED: An un-authored report covers the recent discovery of a dinosaur-like creature that roamed Earth at least 10 million years earlier than the oldest known dinosaur. The discovery was reported in Nature HERE.
The ABC report concludes: "The names asilisaurus kongwe comes from "asili," which means "founder" in Swahili, "sauros", the Greek for "lizard", and "kongwe," Swahili for "ancient".
THE COMPLAINT: As stated in the actual article the etymology of the name is derived thus "Etymology. From asili, Swahili for ancestor or foundation, and sauros, Greek for lizard; kongwe, Swahili for ancient.
The online Swahili - English translator (http://africanlanguages.com/swahili/) indicates the Swahili word for founder is "Mwamba". Clearly the dinosaur is named "Asilisaurus kongwe" and not "mwambasaurus kongwe".
Please correct the report to include the etymology stated in the original Nature article.
ABC ED POL 5.2.2 Accuracy
OUTCOME: Thank you for your emails of 6 and 8 March, regarding the ABC News online report Scientists discover ancient dinosaur ancestor.
Your concerns have been investigated by Audience and Consumer Affairs, a unit which is separate to and independent of program making areas within the ABC. We have reviewed the broadcast, assessed it against the ABC’s editorial standards and sought and considered material provided by ABC News.
I am advised by ABC News management that the error originated in the copy supplied to the ABC by its partner news agency AFP. The ABC News online editor has corrected the report and brought the error to the attention of AFP.
Please be assured that your comments have been brought to the attention of ABC News management. For your reference, the ABC’s Editorial Policies are available online at: http://abc.net.au/corp/pubs/
COMMENT: Nature says "asili", ABC says "Mwamba" - jambo ambalo si kweli
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Was it in the International Journal of Sour Eggs?
Updated 23/3/2010
ABC HEADLINE: "Climate change scientists hit back" PM Radio National 5/3/2010
ABC REPORTED: ABC reporter Di Bain interviewed Professor David Karoly about new study that allegedly "shores up the facts and figures behind global warming." The focus of the report was an interview with co-author of the study, Melbourne University's Professor David Karoly. Di Bain asked David Karoly four questions about the study, including:
1. What prompted the research?
2. What does this report do to debunk the growing scepticism about climate change?
3. How does the person who isn't adept in the science know what figures to trust, especially after the recent IPCC errors and the climate change email scandal last year?
4. The climate change debate doesn't appear to be the number one priority for Kevin Rudd anymore, are the sceptics winning the public debate in Australia?
THE COMPLAINT:
1. The title, and source of the study were not stated in the program leaving listeners with no knowledge of where the research was published. Was it in the International Journal of Sour Eggs, or perhaps Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change? Please amend the report with the title and source of the study.
2. The extent of questions did not concern the study itself and listeners were left somewhat in the dark as to what Prof. Karoly actually found. Presumably the ABC reporter asked Prof Karoly more questions. As this report poorly represents the research findings can ABC news post the interview in its entirety to its website?
OUTCOME: Received 22/3/2010
The report's title is: "Detection and attribution of climate change: a regional perspective."
It was published on the 5th of March by the peer review journal "Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews". An online scientific journal which collaborates with the Royal Meteorological Society and the Royal Geographical Society.
A link to the article is: http://wires.wiley.com/
This link has been added to the transcript of the story.
The ABC reporter did ask Prof Karoly more questions but there was not time to run the 9 minute interview in its entirety. The questions and answers used were judged by the program makers as those which would be heard and understood while giving the essence of the story .
There are no plans at this stage to post the whole interview if indeed it remains in the system.
Yours sincerely,
COMMENT: Yet another under done science report.
ABC HEADLINE: "Climate change scientists hit back" PM Radio National 5/3/2010
ABC REPORTED: ABC reporter Di Bain interviewed Professor David Karoly about new study that allegedly "shores up the facts and figures behind global warming." The focus of the report was an interview with co-author of the study, Melbourne University's Professor David Karoly. Di Bain asked David Karoly four questions about the study, including:
1. What prompted the research?
2. What does this report do to debunk the growing scepticism about climate change?
3. How does the person who isn't adept in the science know what figures to trust, especially after the recent IPCC errors and the climate change email scandal last year?
4. The climate change debate doesn't appear to be the number one priority for Kevin Rudd anymore, are the sceptics winning the public debate in Australia?
THE COMPLAINT:
1. The title, and source of the study were not stated in the program leaving listeners with no knowledge of where the research was published. Was it in the International Journal of Sour Eggs, or perhaps Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change? Please amend the report with the title and source of the study.
2. The extent of questions did not concern the study itself and listeners were left somewhat in the dark as to what Prof. Karoly actually found. Presumably the ABC reporter asked Prof Karoly more questions. As this report poorly represents the research findings can ABC news post the interview in its entirety to its website?
OUTCOME: Received 22/3/2010
The report's title is: "Detection and attribution of climate change: a regional perspective."
It was published on the 5th of March by the peer review journal "Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews". An online scientific journal which collaborates with the Royal Meteorological Society and the Royal Geographical Society.
A link to the article is: http://wires.wiley.com/
This link has been added to the transcript of the story.
The ABC reporter did ask Prof Karoly more questions but there was not time to run the 9 minute interview in its entirety. The questions and answers used were judged by the program makers as those which would be heard and understood while giving the essence of the story .
There are no plans at this stage to post the whole interview if indeed it remains in the system.
Yours sincerely,
COMMENT: Yet another under done science report.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)