Guest post by Sophia[...]: on the reification of words »« In counterfactual land

George Galloway 5, all scientists 2

Martin Robbins has, as he says, done a bloody petition. He hates them but did this one anyway, so you see how it is.

BBC Question Time: Please give scientists proper representation on Question Time

He provides a graph on it:

BBC Question Time: Please give scientists proper representation on Question Time

Since the last general election, scientists have been less well-represented on BBC Question time than reality TV show contestants. Nigel Farage of UKIP – a party without an MP – has appeared on the show four times more often than all scientists put together. Important debates on climate change have been conducted with denialists such as Melanie Phillips, Nigel Lawson and James Delingpole, without a single climate scientist given an opportunity to contribute. Debates on drug policy have been held between comedians and columnists, without a single medical expert present.

It’s time to end this bias. Please, Question Time producers, demonstrate that you’re interested in serious debate and put people with real scientific expertise on your show.

George Galloway, more than twice as often as all scientists. It’s a god damn outrage.

Comments

  1. PatrickG says

    If you’ve paid attention to the Beeb’s science reporting, this won’t come as a surprise.

    Wait, they have science reporting?

  2. sc_770d159609e0f8deaa72849e3731a29d says

    Would any sensible scientist- would any sensible person- want to be on a programme with people like this?

  3. aziraphale says

    The two scientists were Colin Blakemore (neurobiologist) and Lord Winston (expert on human fertility). Both men have been involved in public controversy and have had a considerable media presence – each has had more than one TV series. I suspect they were chosen for those reasons and that their being scientists was secondary.

  4. says

    Remember, it’s Question Time, not Answer Time. We’re not actually supposed to learn anything or come to any kind of conclusion. As such, having people in who know what they’re talking about is completely counterproductive.

  5. Shatterface says

    QT is a case study in false balance anyway: if they put a scientist on they’d feel compelled to bring on a creationist or a climate change denialist for ‘balance’ so that ‘all sides of the controversy’ are represented.