From Junkfood Science, concerning “Unfettered ‘citizen journalism’ too risky”:
More proposals to regulate and license bloggers because we’re “too risky” 
It’s a rare reporter with expertise in the field he/she is reporting on: one with a medical degree reporting on health and obesity, one with a food science degree reporting on food, and one with a science degrees reporting on science.
I think the same thing about most articles written about homeschooling.
All the mainstream media reading I’ve done about homeschooling has caused me to question what I read in many of the non-homeschooling articles. I know how skewed the reporting of homeschooling can be, by both mainstream reporters and homeschoolers (undoubtedly, I have my own biases and blind spots), so that now I read everyday articles with a similar awareness.
- When unnamed experts are mentioned — “experts say” — I wonder which ones and how many and whether they’re liberal, conservative, libertarian, old, young, cutting edge, man, woman, …
- When an expert is mentioned, I wonder which side of the discussion he or she favors.
- When people are quoted in non-expert context, I wonder what else they said and if what was reported was what the speaker meant.
- When language is poorly used, I immediately suspect the integrity of the rest of the article.
- When statistics are used, I wonder how thorough the count was, who was asked and what each person’s understanding of the question was (“Students were considered to be homeschooled if their parents reported them being schooled at home instead of at a public or private school, if their enrollment in public or private schools did not exceed 25 hours a week.”)
- When laws are quoted, I wonder if it was the complete text or only the part useful in the context.
Whether all of this is helpful to me in my everyday understanding (or misunderstanding) of the daily news, I don’t know. I do know it takes me longer to read the morning paper.
posted by Valerie
HEM
Helen
Tracy
mark
marynix
ann-lahrson-fisher
valerie
sandi
david