There will always be a place for science journalism, but there is no harm in highlighting the (many) poor articles, and poor writing that sensationalise, distory and, yes, even lie about the evidence. Blogging can do a lot of good in that respect certainly, but I do want to read well crafted articles by science journlaists who can elucidate things I cannot get from even a good ‘basic’ blog, and will have put in the time and effort and craft to produce something both interesting and informative.

I thought I’d add a brief comment as someone who was quoted in the Nature piece — accurately but incompletely — admitting to the occasional use of press releases.

I’m broadly in agreement that journalism by press release is a bad thing — especially when it is *all* that a reporter or news outlet produces. However, they do have a place, and it isn’t always unjustified to rely occasionally on well-written releases as a short-cut.

The reason is that they free up so much more time to spend on other things. If I were to report everything with the thoroughness I would like, I would need a 20-day week — not least because of editors’ demands for coverage of stories I don’t particularly rate, and their tendency to want to cover themselves in case something that’s heavily done elsewhere is missed. Deadlines can also be extremely tight — especially when reporting for a UK newspaper on papers with West Coast authors. That’s an 8 hour time change, leaving little or no opportunity to speak to a scientist on the same day.

By using a good press release in these circumstances (backed up at least by reading the published paper, and usually with a call to the lead author too), it becomes possible to get them out of the way quickly and accurately (if with little added value). That means I still have time to concentrate on the core of the job — chasing down exclusives, writing explanatory pieces that really add value, and reporting fully and forensically on the items that really matter. If used properly and selectively, good press releases can help a conscientious reporter who wants to break stories and write original material to do the job.

It’s too simplistic to see every press-release rewrite as the same. If it’s all that people do, it’s a fair cop. But if the reporter in question is also producing a lot of good original work, it’s a different matter.