"The mainstream mediaâs greatest failure has been its membersâ inability to acknowledge this reality. Over and over, no matter what the issueâno matter how outlandish, illogical, or simply untrue the conservative argument has beenâjournalists create a sense of false equivalence between positions that rest on data and logic and those that donât. To quote Cenk Uygur, âIf CNN did sports reporting, every game would be a tie.â
The clearest example can be found in the global warming debate where, as I recently argued, âThe mainstream media irresponsibly treats uncredentialed climate deniers ⦠with the same degree of respect as climate scientists who are qualified to judge the problem. In doing so, they ignore the fact that, led by massive investments from Charles and David Koch, âConservative billionaires used a secretive funding route to channel nearly $120m (£77m) to more than 100 groups casting doubt about the science behind climate change.â
False equivalence is a logical fallacy where there appears to be a logical equivalence between two opposing arguments, but when in fact there is none. Journalists use a form of this logical fallacy when comparing two sides of a scientific debate in an attempt to provide a balance between a scientific and denialist point of view. However, there is no equivalence between the two sides, when one is supported by evidence, and the other side with little or no evidence, of which most is of low quality. In other words, in false equivalence, someone will state that the opposing arguments have a passing similarity in support, when, on close examination, there is large difference between the quality of evidence
The clearest example can be found in the global warming debate where, as I recently argued, âThe mainstream media irresponsibly treats uncredentialed climate deniers ⦠with the same degree of respect as climate scientists who are qualified to judge the problem. In doing so, they ignore the fact that, led by massive investments from Charles and David Koch, âConservative billionaires used a secretive funding route to channel nearly $120m (£77m) to more than 100 groups casting doubt about the science behind climate change.â
False equivalence is a logical fallacy where there appears to be a logical equivalence between two opposing arguments, but when in fact there is none. Journalists use a form of this logical fallacy when comparing two sides of a scientific debate in an attempt to provide a balance between a scientific and denialist point of view. However, there is no equivalence between the two sides, when one is supported by evidence, and the other side with little or no evidence, of which most is of low quality. In other words, in false equivalence, someone will state that the opposing arguments have a passing similarity in support, when, on close examination, there is large difference between the quality of evidence
