Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Why news media can’t acknowledge what the Tennessee schools bill actually says

Evolution News and Views

Here, at Evolution News & Views, Casey Luskin analyzes the news media’s flurry of condemnation of Tennessee’s recent act, allowing teachers to present evidence against “settled science” (= establishment bumph):

Just as I told you would happen, critics have one and only one talking point against the academic freedom bill: that it would promote “creationism,” “theology,” and “religious doctrine” in public schools. Let’s remind ourselves of what the bill actually says:

This section only protects the teaching of scientific information, and shall not be construed to promote any religious or non-religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs or non-beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or non-religion.

He dissects further here and here.

Couple of things to keep in mind about legacy media:

1. Their news gathering model is out of date, which is why they are bleeding circulation from every outlet. Essentially, on many subjects today, you can usually find out more accurate information more quickly by doing your own straightforward Internet search than you can by reading a “newspaper of record.”

2. One outcome of slow decline is that such media attract conformist journalists who spout a party line because they really haven’t any better ambitions or ideas.

3. They also attach themselves to establishment figures and causes, for protection, which leads to a loss of news gathering independence. They begin to act with a degree of irresponsibility that we used to associate with the tabloid press.

4. Remember the “air traffic controller” rule. The more vital the information is, the less biased the provider can afford to be. The ATC is allowed only one bias: Getting planes down safely. Now turn that around: In a world where people can learn about events quite easily without the legacy media, the legacy media slowly begin to write fiction that pleases themselves and their remaining readers.

Thus, it actually doesn’t matter to them what the Tennessee bill says, or what its outcome will be. They are constructing a work of fiction pleasing to themselves and their readers. The news story is simply an inspiration for an alternative reality. Read it if you like – but not for news.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

“settled science” = Scientific Nomenklatura!!! Enezio E. De Almeida Filho
F/N: Kindly cf comment in the closely related thread here. We are seeing a mass failure of duties of care to basic fact-checking, truth and fairness that should lead any thoughtful person to assign zero credibility to the authors, editors and publishers of such smear jobs; they sound like their main reference on design theory -- unacknowledged, of course -- is the cluster of hit pieces at Wikipedia; if lies, half truths and smears are allowed to swarm down the truth, and if those willing to issue or trumpet smears are allowed to retain an unwarranted aura of credibility and even twist about to pretend that it is the whistleblowers who are wrong, we will all suffer. I suggest a look here at my main response on merits, including on exactly the limitations of science highlighted in the bill -- the very response we are seeing is a proof of just how needed it is, starting with editorial boards. Cf the straight/spin assessment framework here. KF kairosfocus
I've noticed that, despite the bill being all of two pages, just about no one who comments on this bill critically will actually quote it in full. http://www.capitol.tn.gov/Bills/107/Bill/SB0893.pdf There it is. It's hard to be all offended or worked up over it if you actually read it. The bill, on its own, is pretty immune to scaremongering. nullasalus

Leave a Reply