David Shukman

By key_concepts_team, on 12 October 2009

Being the Environment and Science correspondent, David Shukman has particular control over the scientific bulletins which reach both the six o’clock and ten o’clock news programmes. With the BBC being arguably one of the greatest sources of impartial information and with its ability to reach a wide and diverse audience, the choice as to which stories do and do not qualify for broadcast undoubtedly has huge sway on public awareness and reaction. On his BBC biography David Shuckman is portrayed as having particular interest in environmental stories and climate change (interestingly), despite having no clear previous association with science himself and with his previous experience being more related to international political affairs.

1

ivanwells wrote on 19 October 2009:

Interesting, but considering the nepotism within the BBC not surprising.

As part of their “Editorial Policy” they claim that:
‘When a BBC correspondent reports a story, the aim is to provide an insight based on evidence and on professional judgement – uncluttered by commercial interest or the need to support a particuar proprietor or ideology.’
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/aboutbbcnews/hi/editorial_policy/newsid_3247000/3247578.stm]

Interesting to know how David Shukham is able to provide “professional judgement” to the worth of scientific news stories?
I guess just his years of experience dealing with conflict situations in war torn countries – he’s reported on the conflicts in Northern Ireland, the Gulf, Bosnia, Sri Lanka, Israel and East Timor – must be similar to dealing with scientists?
2

Bobby Cox wrote on 1 December 2009:

Climate change is a constant of the universe. No period of stability can be documented. The contention that successful societies can change the climate buy burning fossil fuels is born of self loathing delusion, buttressed by poor science. It is far more likely that unsuccessful societies adversely affect the climate through poor range management etc. What we are doing now will make the problem worse and far more dangerous is this panic caused by “Crying Wolf” will deafen the public to any real threats if they materialize.