{"title":"垃圾科学与环境政策:用误导性话语模糊公众辩论","authors":"Charles N. Herrick","doi":"10.13021/G8PPPQ.212001.359","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although the term \"junk science\" has become a fixture in the popular media, content analysis of news stories for a five-year period reveals almost no evidence of s ubsta ntive or procedural inadequacies in the science used to support environmental or public health policies. Instead, the charge of \"junk science\" is meaningful primarily from a political or ideological perspective,and plays a strategic role in contrarian, anti-regulatory discourse.","PeriodicalId":82464,"journal":{"name":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","volume":"21 1","pages":"11-16"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"34","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Junk Science and Environmental Policy: Obscuring Public Debate with Misleading Discourse\",\"authors\":\"Charles N. Herrick\",\"doi\":\"10.13021/G8PPPQ.212001.359\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although the term \\\"junk science\\\" has become a fixture in the popular media, content analysis of news stories for a five-year period reveals almost no evidence of s ubsta ntive or procedural inadequacies in the science used to support environmental or public health policies. Instead, the charge of \\\"junk science\\\" is meaningful primarily from a political or ideological perspective,and plays a strategic role in contrarian, anti-regulatory discourse.\",\"PeriodicalId\":82464,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"11-16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2001-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"34\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.212001.359\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Report from the Institute for Philosophy & Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13021/G8PPPQ.212001.359","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Junk Science and Environmental Policy: Obscuring Public Debate with Misleading Discourse
Although the term "junk science" has become a fixture in the popular media, content analysis of news stories for a five-year period reveals almost no evidence of s ubsta ntive or procedural inadequacies in the science used to support environmental or public health policies. Instead, the charge of "junk science" is meaningful primarily from a political or ideological perspective,and plays a strategic role in contrarian, anti-regulatory discourse.