Wrong equal weighting

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wrong equal weighting or wrong balance ( English False Balance ) is a phenomenon of media distortion , in which mainly in science journalism much space is a clear minority opinion unduly given so falsely creating the impression minority opinion and consensus opinion would be equivalent. Here, for example, arguments and evidence are cited that are disproportionate to the actual evidence of the respective pages or ignore information that would make the allegation of a party seem unfounded.

Incorrect equal weighting can sometimes arise from motives similar to sensational journalism, so that questions with scientific consensus are suddenly presented as a contentious debate. Reasons can be sought, for example, in the hope of decision-makers who expect greater commercial success than a more accurate representation of the problem. In particular, this applies to scientific subject areas whose research results can be expected to have an impact on economic sectors or political decisions. Incorrect equilibrium is thus taken into account as part of contemporary polarization in western societies and in science communication .

Unlike other media distortions, improper equilibrium results from an attempt to avoid distortion. Production management and editorial staff can go unnoticed that they are not treating competing views in proportion to their strengths and significance by treating them completely equally. This can be expressed, for example, in equal proportions of airtime , even if it can be known in advance that individual positions are based on incorrect or controversial information.

A well-known example of imbalance is the supposedly balanced reporting of man-made global warming . An influential study from 2004 found that of 636 media articles examined that had appeared in four major US newspapers between 1988 and 2002, around 53% reported "balanced" reports, that is, the theses weighted approximately equally that the human being was significant Share in global warming or that global warming is exclusively natural. 35% of the articles emphasized the existence of man-made global warming, but also mentioned the counter-thesis that the warming has natural causes. In contrast, only 6% of the articles correctly reproduced the scientific consensus by attributing the warming to humans without presenting an opposing thesis. The reporting also changed over time. While in 1988 the majority of the reports still correctly reflected the view of science, from around 1990 journalists started disinformation campaigns in the organized climate denial scene etc. a. by the Global Climate Coalition and the Heartland Institute to report "balanced". At the same time, the press began to replace scientists as the most frequently cited sources with politicians as sources of information. Due to the supposedly balanced reporting, which has its origin in the fairness doctrine , climate deniers and their theses were systematically favored in the media, as they received much more attention than they actually deserved due to the broad scientific consensus.

Further examples

See also

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Martin Paul: Science and Journalism: Interview - When to Separate Facts and Opinions. In: Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk . July 18, 2018, accessed May 10, 2020 .
  2. ↑ Ultralative: facts and how not to deal with them | Incorrect equilibrium on YouTube , May 10, 2020, accessed May 10, 2020.
  3. ^ Paul Krugman : Opinion - A False Balance. In: The New York Times . January 30, 2006, accessed May 10, 2020 .
  4. ↑ Maxwell T. Boykoff, Jules M. Boykoff: balance as bias: global warming and the US prestige press . In: Global Environmental Change . tape 14 , 2004, p. 125–136 , doi : 10.1016 / j.gloenvcha.2003.10.001 .
  5. ↑ James Lawrence Powell: The Inquisition of Climate Science . New York 2012, pp. 121f.
  6. ↑ Naomi Oreskes , Erik M. Conway : The Machiavellis of Science. The network of denial. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim 2014, p. 267f.