Comments on: You Call That Fact-Checking?

By: The Yale Forum on Climate Change & The Media » Two Weeks of Intense Climate DialogueOver Columnist George Will’s Flawed Column

Thu, 05 Mar 2009 18:03:05 +0000

[...] Discover Magazine Carl Zimmer 2/21/09 piece, “You Call That Fact Checking?“. [...]

By: George F. Will goes platinum « Greenfyre’s

George F. Will goes platinum « Greenfyre’s — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:51:19 +0000

[...] You Call That Fact-Checking? [...]

By: George Will: Locked In Ice! | The Loom | Discover Magazine

George Will: Locked In Ice! | The Loom | Discover Magazine — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 19:16:32 +0000

[...] week I dedicated a few posts (1, 2, 3, 4) to a column by George Will on global warming as an example of why fact-checking is important. [...]

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 03:04:08 +0000

Discover is just a SciAm wanna be so when SciAm went political and flushed science down the tubes, Discover went right after them

By: Teri

Teri — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:14:37 +0000

I’m so glad someone finally said it!! Global warming is a huge scam!! HUGE SCAM!! Someone said, “Professor Brad Delong and Dean Baker in his “Beat the Press” blog have long pointed out the weird relationship that the the Washington Post has developed with the truth and dealing with basic facts that don’t fit the world view of its editorial page…” “world view of its editorial page”??? How about whether it’s true or not?! Not whether it’s a popular sentiment or not. Does the fact that there is carbon dioxide on Mars mean nothing to you people?? Hmmm…. last I heard, there were no humans on Mars.

By: James Saultz

James Saultz — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 22:57:45 +0000

This kinda juvenile “gotchaism” is exactly why I don’t read trite little mags such as Discover any more. I would say Gotchaism journalism, but alas, it’s obvious there is no journalism to be found anywhere among today’s AGW fanatics. Just an intense desire to see dead humans…

By: Mike M

Mike M — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 20:55:47 +0000

George Will said – “…the increase in sea ice has been the fastest change, either up or down, since 1979, when satellite record-keeping began. ” That’s … TRUE!

As for: “.. there is as much sea ice today as there was in 1979. If there is “global” warming it certainly is hiding very well. Perhaps it has gone underground, either shy of all of the media attention, or nervous about being found out that it’s nothing more than a fraud. ”

Okay, he got the year wrong, it should have been 1980 when there was 19.7E6 KM^2 in January; January 2009 was 19.9E6. For those of you from Rio Linda that is ONE PERCENT MORE global sea ice than 29 years ago!

Human Caused Global Warming (AGW) Alarmism is a HUGE SCAM!

By: Washington Post Ombudsman « Organizational Ombudsman Blog

Washington Post Ombudsman « Organizational Ombudsman Blog — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 00:26:56 +0000

[...] in the above paragraph. It’s from Discover Magazine Science Blog, you can read it here. It takes on the lack of or poor fact checking, but in reality it’s about what it’s [...]

By: Waiting for WaPo « The Way Things Break

Waiting for WaPo « The Way Things Break — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 22:03:59 +0000

[...] Carl Zimmer, The Loom/DiscoBlogs – You Call That Fact-Checking? [2/21/09] [...]

By: Rickstersherpa

Rickstersherpa — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 01:44:59 +0000

Professor Brad Delong and Dean Baker in his “Beat the Press” blog have long pointed out the weird relationship that the Washington Post has developed with the truth and dealing with basic facts that don’t fit the world view of its editorial page and the large number of conservative writers who find a home there. Professor Delong speaks of it as the Washington Post death spiral.

By: A Wrinkle In Ice (or Not) | The Loom | Discover Magazine

A Wrinkle In Ice (or Not) | The Loom | Discover Magazine — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:53:22 +0000

[...] Blogs / The Loom « You Call That Fact-Checking? [...]

By: ken melvin

ken melvin — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 13:33:59 +0000

What credibility Will, Krauthammer, Kristol, Gingrich, Perle, Kagan, Hiatt, …, the lot? Why are they being thrust in our faces?

By: Richard H. Serlin

Richard H. Serlin — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 03:47:26 +0000

It’s ok, at least in some cases, to state something as a persons opinion, but if that opinion is that the Earth is flat, journalists, who should consider it their highest duty not to mislead the public, should note that all scientists believe that it’s been conclusively proven not flat.

Journalists do their duty shamefully when they print he said, she said, and never let the public know that objective scientists or experts overwhelmingly believe that he is wrong and have a mountain of evidence to prove it.

By: Nicole

Nicole — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 22:23:08 +0000

I guess you can’t come out and say that they’re being weird, political and religious because that would invite backlash. You’re right to keep a cool head and go after the larger issue. The Washington Post is being weird, political and religious though. It’s creepy.

By: Paul Riddell

Paul Riddell — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 20:16:44 +0000

Having a bit of a journalism background, it’s easy to apply Riddell’s Law (“Any sufficiently developed incompetence is indistinguishable from conspiracy”) to understand why the factcheckers didn’t call Will on his gibberish. Even before the big newspaper layoffs, most factcheckers were and are interns or part-time wage slaves hopeful that they’d be hired if they just shut up, take the abuse, and continue to kiss editorial butt. The last thing you want to do, in that situation, is point out that one of the paper’s star columnists is full of garbage, especially if you can point out line and verse.

Speaking as someone who faced a literal temper tantrum when an assistant editor discovered that I was getting more and better reviews of my articles than he was for his, I can tell you that nothing combines an ego big enough to produce tides and a skin too thin to be used for condoms than a newspaper columnist. This is especially true when the critic is a part-time employee within the columnist’s own organization, the columnist has an overarching sense of his own importance, and when the paper’s editors are too cowardly, lazy, or arrogant to tell their drinking buddy to rewrite or kill the column. That’s why nobody was willing to face Will’s wrath.