Madness. What were NG thinking? No more science based reporting on global warming/climate change (unless they have an editorial independence clause) . An absolute disaster.
Exactly. I really blanched when I read their attempt at reassuring people that their view of climate change would not conflict with NG's scientific mission:
In response to the concern about conflicting outlooks, executives underscored that the agreement builds upon an 18-year partnership between the two groups for National Geographic Channels, a moneymaking venture of domestic and international cable TV channels available in more than 500 million homes in 171 countries. Mr. Knell said that during that time, Fox had not exerted “any sort of political or editorial interference.”
Can't fool me with that. I've seen those channels. They're one of my pet TV peeves because 1) The programs are shit, unless you really like comically dramatic fear-mongering shows about drugs, prisons or dangerous animals, and 2) none of them even approach discussing issues of real importance in science or any other fields. There's no need for political or editorial interference if you're just slapping a yellow rectangle on some lowest-common-denominator crap. Only the History Channel (U.S.) has abdicated more of its potential to inform (unless you really, really like Alaska, armageddon, and antiques).
Apologies. I didn't set out to write a rant-y comment, but...
Madness. What were NG thinking? No more science based reporting on global warming/climate change (unless they have an editorial independence clause) . An absolute disaster.
Exactly. I really blanched when I read their attempt at reassuring people that their view of climate change would not conflict with NG's scientific mission:
Can't fool me with that. I've seen those channels. They're one of my pet TV peeves because 1) The programs are shit, unless you really like comically dramatic fear-mongering shows about drugs, prisons or dangerous animals, and 2) none of them even approach discussing issues of real importance in science or any other fields. There's no need for political or editorial interference if you're just slapping a yellow rectangle on some lowest-common-denominator crap. Only the History Channel (U.S.) has abdicated more of its potential to inform (unless you really, really like Alaska, armageddon, and antiques).
Apologies. I didn't set out to write a rant-y comment, but...