Re: FW: News Media and How to Deceive

[Doug Wells <wells@physics.isu.edu>]

Luke:

I had to look at my original e-mail to see if I had made many of the allegations that you accuse me of.  I don't believe that I did, but I did fail to give credit to the many well-educated and talented teachers that are part of the education system.  For that, I apologize.  That said, some of the other claims in your e-mail seem more like displeasure with the priorities of society than with anything that I wrote.  For example, it's well known that K-12 teachers are poorly compensated for their work (something that University professors share with them).  It's also documented that only approximately 50% of High School physics teachers have a degree in physics.  The lack of education success of American students in physics (or other sciences), when compared to other nations is also well documented.  Part of this lack of success is due (I claim) to unqualified teachers.  In fact, you are an excellent example BECAUSE you
left the teaching profession to seek employment at a pay-scale that is commensurate with your expertise.  Unfortunately, the odds are approximately 50/50 that your replacement did not have the education that you have and, unlike yourself, is not qualified to teach physics.

I am at a loss as to where I said that physics (or science) was more important than economics.   Can you point me to the passage?  As for the importance and relevance of science, I think I need merely point to taxes and the national economy.  Billions are being spent on DOE site "cleanup", on the Space Station, on Star Wars and many other follies.  Would the taxpayer support most of this work is they were better informed?  I think not.

As for your request to "put my money where my mouth is", I can only presume that you have detailed knowledge of how I spend my time.  An interesting claim.   How did you come by this knowledge?

Doug

LUKE PAULUS wrote:

> Doug,
>
> I believe that you are correct in your observations regarding how the news media operates.  Many individuals are money oriented.  But, being a former public school teacher I take offense at your last point.
>
> I state that I'm a former teacher because I could not support a family at a desireable standard of living due to the meager salary offered to teachers.  Because of this, I sought and received a MS in Health Physics.  I truly wish that I could have continued my career as a school teacher because I found it challenging and extremely gratifying.
>
> I found your statements regarding education in grades K-12 rather naive.  Science and technology fields tend to be rather specific.  That's why there is a need for individuals with science and technology aptitudes in many aspects of our society.  But there are many other areas of expertise that to be a responsible member of society, members of the public should be well informed.  For example, how many people can read and interpret the finnancial page of the Wall Street Journal?  Why do science and technology folks strongly believe that their fields of expertise are the most important and should be given lots of attention in the public classroom setting when many more "down to earth" topics need to be addressed.  Is the understanding of the risks associated with a 1 mrem dose as important to a 16 year-old as understanding the implications of the collapse of the economic system in Asia?
>
> Secondly, during my tenure as a senior high school science teacher, I met many teachers who went above and beyond their initial education backgrounds and funding to teach their students and provide them with as  much knowledge as possible.  This often involved supplementing the "lousy textbooks" with other references and materials or involved spending many extra hours (without compensation) arranging field trips and researching other available resources.
>
> Also, during my stint as a Health Physicist I have encountered several science and technology folks that have made unfounded and incorrect scientific statements.  One poor example of such a statement came from an HP tech who informed me (while I was still a teacher) that whole body counting was a technique used to determine all dose and exposure ever received - that the body acts as a dosimeter.
>
> I believe that it is not wise to blame the lack of understanding of science or technology demonstrated by our society and the media on public education for grades K-12.  Public education is merely a symptom of a greater problem of which I don't feel qualified to entirely identify.  If public education truly is the problem, don't merely place blame.  Put your money where your mouth is and work towards solving the problem.  For our children's sake, we should all be an integral part of our children's education as well as working towards gaining an understanding of the obstacles that teachers face daily and the lack of support they must deal with constantly.  If you feel strongly or disagree with statements or inconsistencies presented by the media, contact the publishers or broadcasters involved and inform them of their incorrect statements and correct them.  You may not get the results you seek.  But, at least try.
>
> Luke Paulus
> lpaulus@deq.state.id.us
>
> >>> Doug Wells <wells@physics.isu.edu> 08/20 11:09 AM >>>
> The major problems, as I see it, are two-fold.  First, few reporters have
> significant scientific training.  One result of this is that "risks" of 1E-3
> and 1E-9 are similar in the eyes of reporters.  It would help if publishers of
> all types of media required that their reporters have some demonstrable
> expertise in the area that they are writing about.
>
> The second factor, probably more important than the first, is that the media is
> in the business of making money (like everyone else).  This means, among other
> things, that they can "sensationalize" stories (for the purpose of sales) only
> to the extent that the public finds these stories believable.  Thus stories
> about gardening, say, tend to be accurate because the public has first-hand
> knowledge of this topic, while stories about science and technology are
> routinely "full of baloney".  I think that the only way for technical folks to
> circumvent this is to focus on science education.  In particular, the education
> of children in grades K-12 is often done with lousy textbooks (locally chosen)
> and teachers with little or no scientific education.  This may be a bitter pill
> for scientists and engineers to swallow (because of the time involved), but I
> don't think that we can ever count on the press to "fix" the problem.
>
> Michael Mokrzycki wrote:
>
> > I humbly submit that boycotting reporters would not be the most effective
> > way to educate them and get your point of view across in the general media.
> >
> > Not to dismiss anyone's horror stories, but I know many reporters and
> > editors who would not under any circumstance sacrifice truth and fairness
> > to make a story more "newsy," and who are horrified by anyone who would.
> >
> > Heck, sometimes reporters even subscribe to lists like RADSAFE to try to
> > learn something.
> >
> > My personal opinions only.
> >
> > Mike Mokrzycki
> > Associated Press
> > New York
> >
> > bobscottchp@juno.com (Robert A Scott) on 08/19/98 03:10:30 PM
> >
> > Please respond to radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> >
> >
> >
> >  To:      Multiple recipients of list
> >           <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
> >
> >  cc:      (bcc: Michael Mokrzycki/TheAP)
> >
> >
> >
> >  Subject: Re: Re[2]: FW: News Media and How to Deceive
> >
> >
> >      WE ALL SHOULD SAY TO THE MEDIA, "NO INTERVIEWS."   NO MATTER WHAT
> > THE HISTORY OF ONE REPORTER OR ONE EDITOR, WITH A POSITIVE REPORT, IF WE
> > ALL BOYCOTTED THE MEDIA, AND MADE THAT KNOWN AS A POSITION, UNTIL THE
> > MEDIA MEMBERS VOWED TO POLICE THEMSELVES ON ISSUES OF INTEGRITY (would
> > that ever happen?  I doubt it), WE MIGHT MAKE A DENT IN THIS WALL OF
> > OBFUSCATION.  BUT I SUSPECT IT WOULD BE WELL INTO THE LATTER HALF OF THE
> > NEXT CENTURY BEFORE WE SAW RESULTS.  UNTIL THAT HAPPENS, WE WHO CONTINUE
> > TO HOPE IN AN HONEST REPORT WILL HAVE A LOOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNG WAIT.
> > OTHER GROUPS PUBLISH THEIR OWN INFORMATION RATHER THAN RELYING ON THE
> > NEWS MEDIA.  OR PERHAPS PAID INFORMATON IN THE NEWSPAPERS AND MAGAZINES
> > WOULD BE MORE EFFECTIVE.
> >
> > from Bob Scott
> > Roger Williams Medical Center
> > bobscottchp@juno.com
> >
> > On Tue, 18 Aug 1998 Ron L. Kathren writes:
> >
> > ............................  of the unethical and illegal release of
> > names.  I guess what floors me in all this is that she was awarded a
> > Pulitzer.
> >
> > But there is an important message in what Ruth says, and it has been
> > butressed by my own experience: some but by no means all members of the
> > media cannot be trusted to be objective and honest.  Regrettably, there
> > is
> > little that can be done to repair the damage that these irresponsible and
> > unprofessional media persons have done.
> >
> > Ron Kathren
> >
> > ************************************************************************
> > The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> > information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
>
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html



************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html