A major reason for poor science journalism in the UK is their horrible libel law. It's extremely easy for scientific crackpots or frauds to bring and win lawsuits against any journalist or other professional who dares call them out on their bogus research / product. This puts a serious chill on efforts to rein in such nonsense.
And of course the sad fact is most people don't know much about science to begin with. A recent study published in _Nature_ using a survey consisting of general science and math questions purported to show that global warming skeptics are slightly more intelligent of science than warming believers. (The media predictably seized on the story, even though the findings are questionable.) But the REAL story was entirely missed. If you look at the raw data, the overall correct responses to the questions in the survey are abysmal! Only 12% correctly answered one of the extremely basic math questions. Less than 70% correctly answered that it takes a year for the earth to orbit the sun. And so on. The truth is that laymen simply don't understand and can't accurately discuss scientific matters.
Just another reason to always try and find the original article and to be very dubious of articles that either come from suspect sources or seem to fail the 'first glance' 'real world' and 'common sense' tests.
Users who posted comments:
Anonymous Poster (1); jack of all trades (1); Mizuti (1)