The coverage is further confused by articles conflating very different things. The flurry of media coverage is slightly odd when nothing has really changed in our scientific understanding, and it’s notable that few of the articles are by science correspondents. “Only now,” wrote Birrell, “is acceptance emerging that the science establishment colluded to dismiss the lab leak hypothesis as a conspiracy theory, assisted by prominent experts with clear conflicts of interest, patsy politicians and a pathetic media.” UnHerd has published pieces by the academic Matthew Crawford, titled “Science has become a cartel”, and journalist Ian Birrell, titled “Beijing’s useful idiots”. Writing in the Daily Mail, journalist Dominic Lawson lambasted the Lancet for its February 2020 publication of a letter by 27 scientists dismissing the lab leak claim.
Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6, has led the charge, telling the Telegraph’s Planet Normal podcast that the scientific community had “shut down any debate”, and that “some scientific journals absolutely refused to publish anything that disagreed with the Chinese view”. I have reflected on that conversation this week as a growing number of commentators and journalists have accused journals and scientists of closing ranks against those who think the Sars-Cov-2 virus could have leaked from a Chinese laboratory. “But,” he concluded, “the science better be bloody good.” He countered that a journal editor’s job is to publish the best science, not shape public debate. Surely no editor wants to undermine public trust in science and hand the sceptics a PR coup. In the bar afterwards, I told him I didn’t entirely believe him. The best journal editors, he said, have a contrary streak. Challenged from the floor about scientific groupthink on climate change, Campbell said he would love to publish a paper that overturned everything we know about climate science. I once attended a panel discussion where Phil Campbell, then editor of Nature, was a speaker. Crying foul against experts and journals serves mainly to chill debate, says Fiona Fox
0 kommentar(er)
