Radio host and fellow UD blogger Barry Arrington notes that there may be progress in legacy media understanding of the intelligent design controversy.
Maybe, but an argument can be made for the fact that the slowness to “get” the possibility that Darwin could be wrong is part of a general trend toward decline, in favor of the blogosphere and other newer media. I cannot imagine advising anyone to learn about the intelligent design controversy by reading dead tree media or zoning out in front of whatever the idiot box normally offers on the subject. That would be like hiring a stupid person to observe and explain a complex situation.
I would rather say go to the blogs of both sides, listen critically, and observe. It’s the only way right now. I expect it is the only way for most controversies right now.
Of course you will get into big trouble if your judgement is no good - but is your judgement really worse than Dan Rather’s? How is that even possible?
Oh, and here’s something else I wrote on why new ideas must now make it in the blogosphere - and therefore the dead trees don’t really matter.