Wednesday, August 10, 2022
70.4 F
Oxnard
More

    Latest Posts

    Goodbye Constitution Freedom America by Don Jans

    Most Journalists are Scientifically Unqualified

    Sponsored - Job Posting

    We are a small but mighty business in Ventura, CA specializing in Civil/Agricultural Engineering and Land Surveying. Going strong for over 35 years. Looking for motivated team players for immediate hire. Candidates must have at least 3 years of experience in Civil Engineering, Land Surveying, and AutoCAD Civil 3D. Must want to grow with the company. For the right person, management potential. Wages will depend on experience. Benefits include paid holidays, matching retirement plan & much more. Send resumes to: [email protected]

    YCE, Inc. is an Equal Opportunity Employer. Tel: 805-650-6995www.YCEinc.com

    By R.W. Malone, MD, MS

    The consequences of journalists writing about scientific matters when they don’t have the intelligence or the training to evaluate the science have been incalculably disastrous.

    Why does anyone rely on reporters to interpret scientific articles?

    They lack the necessary training, experience and competence to interpret scientific publications and data, a skill which typically requires decades to master.

    With few exceptions, corporatized media are not able to comprehend the complexities and ambiguities inherent in scientific discussions, and so repeatedly fall back on the interpretations provided by those who are marketed as fair and accurate arbiters of truth – the US Government, the World Health Organization, the World Economic Forum, and various non-governmental organizations who have an interest in promoting vaccines (Gates’ Foundation, GAVI, CEPI etc.) or other scientific agendas. But these organizations have political and financial objectives of their own, and in the case of the CDC, have clearly become politicized as previously discussed.

    When combined with the increasing prevalence of “advocacy journalism” (which has been actively promoted and funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation), the result has been that the corporate media have become willing vehicles for distribution of biased interpretations promoted by authority figures presented to the public as credible sources, but who actually practice the pseudo-priesthood of Scientism masquerading as science.

    As a consequence, corporate legacy media have largely become distributors and enforcers of government-approved (and composed) narratives and articles rather than objective and impartial investigators and arbiters of truth. This is particularly true of the perverse branch of scientific journalism which has ascended to prominence during the COVIDcrisis, the factchecker organizations (some of which are sponsored by Thompson-Reuters). But how does this propaganda ecosystem work, and what can be done about it?

    To a large extent science and scientists are granted an exalted position in western society due to an implied social contract. Western governments provide them support and society grants elevated social status in exchange for valuable services.

    These services include performing their trade (doing “science”) and teaching others both their craft and findings. Government subsidized (non-corporate) scientists and science are trained and funded by citizens (through their taxes) to practice their craft objectively in a variety of technical domains including medicine and public health on behalf of the citizenry.

    This arrangement stands in contrast to corporate-funded scientists, who work to advance the interests of their employers, but who have often also been trained at taxpayers expense.

    The social contract between scientists and general citizenry assumes that those scientists employed via government funding act in a manner which is free of both political partisanship and external influence from corporations and non-governmental advocacy organizations.

    This social contract is woven throughout federal government hiring and employment policies concerning the civilian science corps. These policies explicitly forbid these employees from engaging in partisan political activities while serving in an official capacity, and forbid conflicts of interest stemming from influence of non-governmental entities, whether for- or not-for-profit.

    When these terms and conditions are not upheld, the public justifiably objects to the breach of contract.  This is why employees of the civilian scientific corps are protected from employment termination for political purposes by the executive branch, even though the Office of the President is tasked with managing the scientific enterprise.

    Failure of the civilian scientific corps to maintain personal and scientific integrity and/or political objectivity appears to have become a chronic condition, as evidenced by the politicization of the CDC.

    When politicization of scientific data and interpretation results in multiple policy decisions which fail to protect the interests of the general public, the public loses faith in both the scientists and the discipline which they purport to practice.  This is particularly true when the breach of social contract is seen as advancing corporate or partisan interests.

    Continue reading→

    The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of Citizens Journal


    TELL YOUR FRIENDS ABOUT CITIZENS JOURNAL  Please keep us publishing – DONATE

    - Advertisement -

    2 COMMENTS

    5 1 vote
    Article Rating
    Subscribe
    Notify of
    guest
    2 Comments
    Newest
    Oldest Most Voted
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    Smith
    Smith
    1 month ago

    sad

    Brooklyn
    Brooklyn
    1 month ago

    great

    Latest Posts

    advertisement

    Don't Miss

    Subscribe

    To receive the news in your inbox

    2
    0
    Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
    ()
    x