I remember an amusing interview with a guy on Radio 4 when they said that the main problem confusing people
was the BBC trying to be "balanced" by always having a climate change sceptic on when they had a person who thought that anthropogenic climate change was a real issue.

He said that if they actually wanted to reflect the balance, they should only have a "sceptic" on opposing every few hundred interviews, as that was the kind of ratio you had amongst genuine scientists.
(Bazongaloid, Fri 7 Oct 2011, 12:31, 1 reply, 14 years ago)

That drives me insane.
I'm very much pro BBC and happy to pay my licence fee and more if it went up, but their intent to be 'balanced' goes way too far and allows every minority viewpoint to get equal air time regardless of worth or merit.

That's how we end uo with coalition governments, I'm sure.
( scarpe We Stole Bikes, Fri 7 Oct 2011, 12:35, Reply)

Basically what you guys just said
I'm not well read on the subject, but everything I've seen agrees. it also agree that the consequenses of not taking this seriously, now, are much, much worse than those of trying to fix it and being wrong.
( CQ Knows the truth, all of it., Fri 7 Oct 2011, 12:38, Reply)