Helene Marsh writes about misrepresentation of her research on the dugong, the threatened marine mammal (Forum, 17 April, p 65).
Suggesting that environmental scientists broaden their advisory role by providing a "menu of options" for action has merit. It will allow scientists to participate in framing the nature of the political debate that occurs. It is a major step from the current practice, which is to make no recommendations and to take no advocacy position as to how the information contained in a scientific study should be used.
Such an approach, however, will not prevent disagreements nor different conclusions being drawn by those on opposing sides of the argument. Environmental issues are not simply scientific but involve a whole gamut of disciplines, perspectives and passions that will not go away no matter how conclusive the science. Perhaps the PR training Marsh advocates should go beyond media skills and include ...
To continue reading this article, subscribe to receive access to all of newscientist.com, including 20 years of archive content.