The Telegraph reports:
BBC journalists are being sent on courses to stop them inviting so many cranks onto programmes to air 'marginal views'.
The BBC Trust on Thursday published a progress report into the corporation's science coverage which was criticised in 2012 for giving too much air-time to critics who oppose non-contentious issues.
The report found that there was still an 'over-rigid application of editorial guidelines on impartiality' which sought to give the 'other side' of the argument, even if that viewpoint was widely dismissed.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by umafuckitt on Sunday July 06 2014, @01:49PM
I don't know that it's an either/or scenario. I do, however, know that when an authority figure or expert enters into a debate with crackpots, the crackpot position is given legitimacy and this strengths it in the eyes of public. I'm pretty sure there have even been studies on the effect. Thus, it seems pretty important that obviously stupid ideas are not given air time. Look what happened with the MMR/autism bullshit: kids actually died of preventable diseases as a consequence of scientifically illiterate reporters believing whatever they read and reporting it.