How the SMC gets science wrong

[Demepivo]

One of the big problems ME/CFS & science in general face is oversimplification.

There is a piece in today’s Guardian how the Science media Centre (SMC) took a piece of neuro-science research, tweaked it, spun it, sent it out the mass media and endless nonsense was repeated the in UK Press.

It is from Dean Burnett, a researcher who is no stranger to over-simplification himself in his Guardian column or in his book the Idiot Brain.

How the media warp science the case of the sensationalised satnav

In these days of “publish or perish” and obsessions with “impact”, it’s not enough to produce a good study, people have to read it as well. To this end, publicity and media departments send out press-releases to draw attention to their latest findings.

This is in no way is this a criticism of the people who do it. It’s a big ask. To make something intensely technical understandable and appealing for a mainstream audience often requires some clever or ingenious way of presenting it.Sometimes they misjudge it spectacularly,but most of the time they get it reasonably right, in my humble opinion.

He goes on to describe how the SMC dealt with with one particular neuroscience piece of research.

I saw the press release as I’m on the mailing list for the Science Media Centre, an independent body that works hard to ensure that scientific reporting is fair and accurate by putting providing journalists and reporters with relevant expert perspectives as soon as any science-based news pops up. I received the press release, and felt I could comment as this is actually my area

The press release was largely fine, but I did flag up problems with the title.

So, myself and Dr Christopher Connolly of Dundee University supplied some comments…..And, next day we found ourselves quoted all over the media, under headlines stating satnavs shut down parts of our brain. Given how many peopledon’t read beyond the headline or first few paragraphs, this isn’t ideal.

He concludes

Imagine how much worse it can be, and regularly is, when it’s something “important”, like new drugs, cures for diseases, controversial subject matters, and so on.

 

[Demepivo]

An endorsement of a critique of the SMC by Sir Simon....

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/844924157259403264

 

[Valentijn]

Maybe someone should let him know that, far from being "independent" the SMC is partially funded by the institutions that they publicize research for. I've seen no honest attempt of "fair and accurate" reporting from them.