Category Archives: Outreach

Press complaint: Daily Mail vs. BICEP2 commentators

In March of this year, immediately following the jubilation surrounding the BICEP2 results, the Daily Mail published a bizarre opinion piece on two scientists that were interviewed about the experiment on BBC’s Newsnight programme. The gist of the article was that the Beeb was cynically polishing its “political correctness” credentials by inviting the scientists to the programme, because they were both non-white and non-male. More details about the debacle can be found in this Guardian article.

Now, I’m not much of a Daily Mail fan at the best of times, but this struck me as particularly egregious; not only were their facts wrong and their tone borderline racist and sexist (in my opinion, at least), but they also seemed to be mistaking science for some sort of all white, all-boys club that women and people of other ethnic groups have no right to involve themselves with. This is damaging to all of us in science, not just those who were personally attacked – so I complained.

I just received word back on my complaint, which was sent to the Press Complaints Commission in the UK, who have the job of (sort of) regulating the press. Their response is reproduced below in full; my allegation of factual inaccuracy was upheld, but they declined to act on the allegation of inappropriate racial/gender commentary because I wasn’t one of the parties being discussed.

Commission’s decision in the case of

A man [me] v Daily Mail

The complainant expressed concern about an article which he considered to have been inaccurate and discriminatory, in breach of Clauses 1 (Accuracy) and 12 (Discrimination) of the Editors’ Code of Practice. The article was a comment piece, in which the columnist had critically noted Newsnight’s selection of “two women….to comment on [a] report about (white, male) American scientists who’ve detected the origins of the universe”.

Under the terms of Clause 1 (i) of the Code, newspapers must take care not to publish inaccurate information, and under Clause 1 (ii) a significant inaccuracy or misleading statement must be corrected promptly, and with “due prominence”.

The newspaper explained that its columnist’s focus on gender and ethnicity was designed to be nothing more than a “cheeky reference” to the BBC’s alleged political correctness. In the columnist’s view, the selection of Dr Maggie Aderin-Pocock and Dr Hiranya Peiris to comment on the BICEP2 (Background Imaging of Cosmic Extragalactic Polarisation) study was another such example of this institutional approach.

The complainant, however, noted the BICEP2 team were, in fact, a diverse, multi-ethnic, multi-national group which included women, something which the newspaper accepted. Furthermore, he said that white, male scientists had been interviewed on Newsnight as well, which undermined the columnist’s claim that Dr Maggie Aderin-Pocock and Dr Hiranya Peiris had been specifically selected. The suggestion that the BICEP2 team were all white and male was a basic error of fact and one which appropriate checks could have helped to prevent. There had been a clear failure to take care not to publish inaccurate information, and a corresponding breach of Clause 1 (i) of the Code.

The newspaper took a number of measures to address the situation: the managing editor wrote to both Dr Aderin-Pocock and Dr Peiris; a letter criticising the columnist’s argument was published the following day; its columnist later explicitly noted both scientists expertise, and competence to comment on the study; and, a correction was published promptly in the newspaper Corrections & clarifications column which acknowledged that the BICEP2 study was “conducted by a diverse team of astronomers from around the world”, and which “apologis[ed] for any suggestion to the contrary”. The latter measure was sufficient to meet the newspaper’s obligation under Clause 1 (ii) of the Code, to correct significantly misleading information.

The columnist’s suggestion that Dr Aderin-Pocock and Dr Peiris were specifically selected for the Newsnight programme because of “political correctness” was clearly presented as his own comment and conjecture which, under Clause 1 (iii) and the principle of freedom of expression, he was entitled to share with readers. There was, therefore, no breach of the Code in publishing that suggestion. However, the subsequent correction of the factual inaccuracy regarding the BICEP2 team and the acknowledgment of both experts’ expertise will have allowed readers to assess the suggestion in a new light.

Under Clause 12 (Discrimination) (ii) of the Code, “details of an individual’s race, colour, religion, sexual orientation, physical or mental illness or disability must be avoided unless genuinely relevant to the story”. The complainant’s concerns under this Clause were twofold; he believed that the references to the gender and ethnic background of both Dr Aderin-Pocock and Dr Peiris, and the BICEP2 team members, were irrelevant in a column about a scientific study. While the terms of Clause 12 (ii) do not cover irrelevant references to gender, the Commission would need to have received a complaint from a member, or members of the BICEP2 team, or Dr Aderin-Pocock or Dr Peiris in order to consider the complaint about under this Clause. In the absence of any such complaints, the Commission could not comment further.

Patrick Moore

Sir Patrick Moore passed away today, aged 89. Through his many, many books, and TV programmes like The Sky at Night, he became Britain’s foremost populariser of astronomy. It’s safe to say he’s inspired several generations of scientists, showing us the poignant beauty of the heavens and incredible excitement of space exploration, all in his own, unique way.

I have a particularly fond memory of him. When I was quite young, probably around 8 years old, my dad and uncle took me to see Patrick give a lecture at the Victoria Hall in Stoke. I seem to remember that much of it was about Mars, and how astronomers past had mistakenly seen canals and other marks of civilisation on its surface. I still have a copy of a little red book of his, “Into Space!”, lying around somewhere at home, that we bought on the night. We also took my copy of Philip’s Atlas of the Universe (another of his), which he graciously signed for me after the lecture. I can’t remember what he said to me, other than that he’d sprained his wrist, so could only manage to scrawl his initials on the first page! I recall being slightly put out by this, for some reason – perhaps because it looked like someone had randomly scrawled on the book, thus defacing it. (Anyone who knows me will have some appreciation of how cardinal a sin the defacement of a book, however slight, is in my eyes.)

Meeting Patrick was one of a number of important events in my development that happened at around the same time. My dad bought me a little black Tasco refractor, and managed to get a stunning view of Jupiter out of it, one that I couldn’t reproduce myself for many years. A couple of years earlier, he’d woken me up in the middle of the night, literally carrying me out of bed to see a lunar eclipse. My parents had also been indulging me by buying science books, which I absolutely lapped up. One of these was Patrick’s Atlas of the Universe, the one he signed, which I often dipped into. In 1999, there was also a solar eclipse in Britain, only partial in Stoke but reaching totality in Cornwall, which I remember Patrick doing the commentary for.

These events, along with many others of a similar nature over the years, have shaped me both intellectually and personally. Being an astrophysicist is a big part of who I am, and I’m forever grateful to all of the people like Patrick who set me out on this path all those years ago. I only hope I can repay the debt by inspiring others myself.

NAM Jodcast interview

Hmmm, don’t think I’ve mentioned this on here before, but I was interviewed by Close Personal Friend (TM) Christina Smith for the Jodcast a few months back, while I was at NAM. Listen agape as I, ahem, masterfully discuss, erm, whatever it is my research is about.

And no, I refuse to believe that I sound like that in real life.