ABC have provided some replies to complaints about science news stories that reveal an insight into the manner its news editors choose the science news it feeds its audience, paid for by Australian taxes. It appears editors simply pick the stories that reflect their own personal bias. For an organisation doing less with more it comes as no surprise but provides further evidence that Maurice Newman's Groupthink culture is hard at work.
Here's the gist: On one hand ABC are happy promoting the unpublished and unsubstantiated "opinions" of a scientist who erroneously suggests Australia's uranium has found its way to the Antarctic. And on the other it fails to report on concerns raised by another scientist published in a respected science journal about a study that erroneously suggested a link between butterfly emergence and global warming.
ABC's response to the complaint about the missing story about the Debunked Butterfly paper HERE.
Reply from ABC CRE to the complaint about the Erroneous Uranium report HERE. (Note that we still await a response from the Minister on how Australia's Uranium found its way to the Antarctic.)
An eye on ABC NEWS: Keeping the bastards who keep the bastards honest - honest.
Showing posts with label butterfly. Show all posts
Showing posts with label butterfly. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Friday, June 18, 2010
Missing News: Butterfly claims debunked
The following complaint has been sent to ABC Audience and Consumer affairs.
Biology Letters have published a comment critical of the butterfly study by Kearney et al that was featured by ABC News and ABC Science. This comment demonstrates serious flaws in the methodology of the study that mean the results are not supported by the data. In other words the study has been de-bunked. ABC provided extensive coverage of the original story but has not yet reported on the damaging critique. I request ABC news provide coverage such that ABC consumers are not mislead.
The comment at Biology Letters can be found here:
http://rsbl.
UPDATE ABC reply received 29 June 2010:
Thank you for your email of 18 June.
I understand the Biology Letters journal website has published an eLetter you wrote in response to the study 'Early emergence in a butterfly causally linked to anthropogenic warming', which was the subject of the ABC Science story 'Butterflies 'fly early as planet warms''. Your request for coverage of your eLetter has been noted and conveyed to relevant staff in ABC Innovation. I am advised that ABC Innovation plans to watch with interest for any response from the authors of the study or the journal.
While you have not disputed the accuracy of the ABC Science story, I understand you believe it is necessary to provide coverage of the publication of your eLetter to ensure that ABC consumers are not misled. On the subject of new information becoming available which may have an impact on the accuracy of online content, sections 4.3.2-4 of the ABC's Editorial Policies state as follows:
"4.3.2 Online corrections: The ABC acknowledges that the archival nature of the online medium raises a number of specific issues in terms of the need to provide editorial correction or clarifications. The ABC publishes its online stories in good faith and believes them to be a true and accurate report of events at the time of publication.
4.3.3 However, the ABC also accepts that from time to time new information is made available which may have an impact on the accuracy of the original content. This may require the inclusion of additional information or a correction. On some occasions the removal of a report from ABC Online may be the appropriate course of action.
4.3.4 The ABC will correct online reports where the relevant editorial manager decides there is a need to present additional information which may not have been available at the time of publication or which may have been overlooked."
Audience & Consumer Affairs sought comment from ABC Innovation on whether the division considers that the publication of your eLetter warrants the inclusion of additional information or a correction to the story. I am advised that ABC Innovation considers that your concerns about the methodology used in the study are best left to the normal processes of scientific review, processes which are yet to play out. ABC Innovation considers that there is no error in the story that requires correction.
Audience & Consumer Affairs notes that Biology Letters has not withdrawn the study or substantially amended its conclusions, and neither the journal nor the study's authors appear to have responded to your concerns about the study's methodology. At this point, the only change from the state of affairs at the time of the story's publication is that an eLetter critical of the study has been published on the journal's website, having been reviewed for suitability and relevance by the journal's editor but not subject to any process of peer review. Having regard to these circumstances, as well as the content of the study, your eLetter, and the story, Audience & Consumer Affairs finds ABC Innovation's position on this matter acceptable and considers that the requirements of sections 4.3.2-4 of the Editorial Policies have been met.
Nonetheless, please be assured that your comments have been noted and conveyed to relevant ABC Innovation staff. Thank you for taking the time to write.
Yours sincerely
ABC Audience & Consumer Affairs
The comment at Biology Letters can be found here:
http://rsbl.
UPDATE ABC reply received 29 June 2010:
Thank you for your email of 18 June.
I understand the Biology Letters journal website has published an eLetter you wrote in response to the study 'Early emergence in a butterfly causally linked to anthropogenic warming', which was the subject of the ABC Science story 'Butterflies 'fly early as planet warms''. Your request for coverage of your eLetter has been noted and conveyed to relevant staff in ABC Innovation. I am advised that ABC Innovation plans to watch with interest for any response from the authors of the study or the journal.
While you have not disputed the accuracy of the ABC Science story, I understand you believe it is necessary to provide coverage of the publication of your eLetter to ensure that ABC consumers are not misled. On the subject of new information becoming available which may have an impact on the accuracy of online content, sections 4.3.2-4 of the ABC's Editorial Policies state as follows:
"4.3.2 Online corrections: The ABC acknowledges that the archival nature of the online medium raises a number of specific issues in terms of the need to provide editorial correction or clarifications. The ABC publishes its online stories in good faith and believes them to be a true and accurate report of events at the time of publication.
4.3.3 However, the ABC also accepts that from time to time new information is made available which may have an impact on the accuracy of the original content. This may require the inclusion of additional information or a correction. On some occasions the removal of a report from ABC Online may be the appropriate course of action.
4.3.4 The ABC will correct online reports where the relevant editorial manager decides there is a need to present additional information which may not have been available at the time of publication or which may have been overlooked."
Audience & Consumer Affairs sought comment from ABC Innovation on whether the division considers that the publication of your eLetter warrants the inclusion of additional information or a correction to the story. I am advised that ABC Innovation considers that your concerns about the methodology used in the study are best left to the normal processes of scientific review, processes which are yet to play out. ABC Innovation considers that there is no error in the story that requires correction.
Audience & Consumer Affairs notes that Biology Letters has not withdrawn the study or substantially amended its conclusions, and neither the journal nor the study's authors appear to have responded to your concerns about the study's methodology. At this point, the only change from the state of affairs at the time of the story's publication is that an eLetter critical of the study has been published on the journal's website, having been reviewed for suitability and relevance by the journal's editor but not subject to any process of peer review. Having regard to these circumstances, as well as the content of the study, your eLetter, and the story, Audience & Consumer Affairs finds ABC Innovation's position on this matter acceptable and considers that the requirements of sections 4.3.2-4 of the Editorial Policies have been met.
Nonetheless, please be assured that your comments have been noted and conveyed to relevant ABC Innovation staff. Thank you for taking the time to write.
Yours sincerely
ABC Audience & Consumer Affairs
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Butterflies 'fly early as planet warms...then again probably not
ABC provided extensive coverage (see HERE) of a Biology Letters paper titled "Early emergence in a butterfly causally linked to anthropogenic warming" in March. A comment challenging the claims of the paper has now been published online by Biology Letters. Will ABC now update their coverage?
"I have obtained the same data used in this study as Kearney et al. and am unable to confirm the results for the historical observation data. I count 239 observations made in Oct-Dec from 1942 to 2009. The annual data show a wide range of earliest observation dates (Figure 1), and at face value the use of 5 year or 10 year averages appears to be a convenient statistical method that hides the very wide spread of observation dates."
"Using this "opportunistic" data to establish emergence is like dating a volcanic eruption based on collection dates of samples housed in a museum. The historical trends identified simply reflect variation in the time collectors have ventured out to observe and collect butterflies. "
"There remains considerable temporal bias in the data, with over 50% of total observations post dating 1990. There is also a considerable bias in observation locations, with the vast majority collected in Melbourne's east and none in the vicinity of Laverton, the weather station that was used to characterise temperature change over the whole of the study area (Figure 2)."
"The paper does not mention well documented Urban Heat Island effects over Melbourne that encompasses Laverton that have clearly affected temperature at this station over the period of study (see Morri and Simmonds, 2000 and Torok et al., 2001). Close examination of other stations in the study area shows a wide variety of temperature trends (Figure 2). It seems the authors have chosen one station that favours their theory without adequately explaining why others should be rejected. "
"Based on these points, I believe that the authors' conclusions remain unsupported by the data presented."
Copies of figures that accompany the Biology Letters comment appear below.
Figure 2 below. Location of H.Merope observations (black dots)-note concentration east of Melbourne CBD and absence of observations near Laverton. Extent of urban development around Melbourne indicated by pink shading. Creeks and rivers shown as blue lines. Topographic contours at 50 m intervals (brown lines) provide an indication of topographic variability over study area, marked by the black outline. Selected weather stations shown as red squares with corresponding historical April-October mean temperature readings obtained from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology shown around the outside-note variation in temperature trends across the study area, including some negative.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Butterfly study: a case study in confirmation bias
COMMENT: On March 18 we put up a brief post titled "Bide our time on butterfly" following extensive ABC coverage of an article in Biology Letters that claims that Early emergence in a butterfly causally linked to anthropogenic warming, namely increases in greenhouse gases. See ABC reports "Butterflies 'fly early as planet warms'" ABC Science online 17/3/2010, and related reports on News Online: "Climate change link to butterflies" , The World Today: "Early butterflies linked to climate change"
The reason for biding our time was to await the results of peer review of a comment on the article MH submitted to Biology Letters just 2 days after the original was posted online. This week the editor of Biology Letters rejected our submission for various reasons. We intend to re-submit the comment piece after we take reviewer's comments into account.
To help address issues raised by the reviewers we have requested help from the extensive readership of Watts Up With That. Blog author Anthony Watts has graciously agreed to help and has posted our comments along with the reviewer comments on the WUWT blog. See Butterfly study: a case study in confirmation bias.
.
We have requested ABC provide some coverage!
The reason for biding our time was to await the results of peer review of a comment on the article MH submitted to Biology Letters just 2 days after the original was posted online. This week the editor of Biology Letters rejected our submission for various reasons. We intend to re-submit the comment piece after we take reviewer's comments into account.
To help address issues raised by the reviewers we have requested help from the extensive readership of Watts Up With That. Blog author Anthony Watts has graciously agreed to help and has posted our comments along with the reviewer comments on the WUWT blog. See Butterfly study: a case study in confirmation bias.
.
We have requested ABC provide some coverage!
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Bide our time on butterfly
ABC HEADLINE: "Butterflies 'fly early as planet warms'" ABC Science online 17/3/2010, and related reports on News Online: "Climate change link to butterflies" , The World Today: "Early butterflies linked to climate change"
ABC REPORTED: ABC provided extensive coverage on a new article in Biology Letters that claims that Early emergence in a butterfly causally linked to anthropogenic warming, namely increases in greenhouse gases.
COMMENT: We'll reserve judgement on this one but would anticipate that the ABC would provide similar coverage to any study that demonstrates the article is wrong. Now that would only be fair and balanced, wouldn't it?
ABC REPORTED: ABC provided extensive coverage on a new article in Biology Letters that claims that Early emergence in a butterfly causally linked to anthropogenic warming, namely increases in greenhouse gases.
COMMENT: We'll reserve judgement on this one but would anticipate that the ABC would provide similar coverage to any study that demonstrates the article is wrong. Now that would only be fair and balanced, wouldn't it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)