New York Times’ Caroline Hopkins and scientists interviewed for the story “Do I Need to Worry About Smartphone Radiation?” should be embarrassed

New York Times’ Caroline Hopkins and scientists interviewed for the story “Do I Need to Worry About Smartphone Radiation?” should be embarrassed

by Dariusz Leszezynski, Between a Rock and a Hard Place, November 15, 2023

Presenting a complex scientific problem in a news media story is a difficult task. On the one hand, the presented science should be accurate but, on the other hand, it should be understood by an average reader, a layperson.

I have given numerous interviews for national and international news outlets and I experienced first-hand the problem of presenting a complex science in a format simplified enough for the laypersons but at the same time scientifically accurate.

On top of the complexity of science, there is always a problem of brevity. Journalists wish that the science story will be not only simple and easy for layperson readers but also short enough that the news media editors will accept it.

So, we have the problem of the complexity of science and the scarcity of space/time to present it in newspapers or TV news.

Then, there is a difficulty in selecting experts to be interviewed. The author of the New York Times’ story, Caroline Hopkins, selected radiation experts Gayle E. Woloschak, and Emily A. Caffrey, and brain tumor researcher Howard A. Fine.

From reading the NYT story, I got the impression that the interviewed experts considered that if wireless radiation doesn’t cause DNA damage and doesn’t heat tissues there is no health risk for humans. If this is all that these experts know about the biological effects of wireless radiation, then they are the wrong experts.

Continue reading:

https://betweenrockandhardplace.wordpress.com/2023/11/15/new-york-times-caroline-hopkins-and-scientists-interviewed-for-the-story-do-i-need-to-worry-about-smartphone-radiation-should-be-embarrassed/