All arguments considered, Dawidoff’s profile strikes me as legitimate in conception, but flawed in execution. Petit is right—to “squelch” this article would have been a shame. While exploring the importance of honest and transparent skepticism (as opposed to the more duplicitous kind proffered by people like Will) to science overall, however, Dawidoff could have done more to challenge the idea that, in this particular instance, Dyson is doing more good than harm.
03:35 PM - April 3, 2009
Making Space for Skeptics
Post, Times draw criticism for coverage questioning global warming
Who cares if it’s true? - Modern-day newsrooms reconsider their values
What Is Russia Today? - The Kremlin’s propaganda outlet has an identity crisis
And from the left…Fox News - There’s more to Fox News’ strategy of hiring liberals than creating a public boxing match
Why Skype isn’t safe for journalists - Here are some alternatives for secure voice calls to use instead
Placing a bet on USA Today - Gannett has long felt the television model could translate into print. Now it’s using its flagship paper to double down on that idea.
Email blasts from CJR writers and editors
Upworthy gets quality, exclusive journalism about income inequality; ProPublica gets a wider audience
We’re not in the Cold War anymore
What you think you know about online advertising is wrong
“Is it going to be hard in two years when you are no longer President and people stop letting you win at basketball?”
Who Owns What
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.