re: #767 reine.de.tout

“actual facts” as determined how? The reporter’s own superior knowledge? Or actual facts as determined by another expert?

Actual facts determined by the reporter’s own investigation into the subject, yes. Which involves reading what experts have written, definitely.

No, a reporter should not assume his scientific knowledge is greater than the reader’s and insert his own opinion.

I’m not sure what you mean by that. The reporter if he’s reporting on a science story should definitely educate himself enough on the subject so that his knowledge is above the average reader and he can report on the subject accurately.

If he has other sources, find them and cite them.

I’m not objecting to citing sources at all. But sources are just sources. Someone can cite Heritage, the Petroleum Institute, and James Watts in a story about global warming and give the impression that it’s not occurring.

Choosing who to cite is itself a judgement call on the part of the reporter.