The focus has shifted from George F. Will’s refusal to accept the science of climate change to the Washington Post‘s refusal to accept responsibility for Will’s breach of journalism’s most sacred tenets. I don’t have more to say, but Carl Zimmer’s second analysis of the problem is bang on. There’s also Joe Romm (again) and Hilzoy of the Washington Monthly.
The bottom line is, Will was caught misrepresenting the science, and when the errors were brought to his editors’ attention, in no uncertain terms, they refused to acknowledge any had been made. It’s one thing to make a sloppy mistake, repeatedly. It’s another to refuse to run a correction when the mistakes are made clear. It’s beginning to look like Joe is right:
If you want to find the best journalism now on climate — the most science-based, the most fact-based, the most relevant to your lives and the lives of your children and the people you care about and indeed all of humanity — you must go to the web, specifically the blogosphere.
There’s still the NY Times‘ Andy Revkin, and the AP’s Seth Borenstein, but other than that, it’s slim pickings among what’s left of the mainstream media.