Don't you think that newspapers nowadays focus much less on Science articles and more on politics. Shouldn't the public be more educated about recent breakthroughs.

The media is all about saying the most with the least amount of words. When they can use a one or two word sound byte, it leaves the reader/viewer to fill in the blanks with all the emotional baggage those words conjure up. It's what happens when news becomes business and keeping readers/viewers from switching to competing sources is the priority rather than the information itself.

 

Science doesn't work like that. The information science news usually has is so layered that it requires more education than most people have to really be informed about it. When they try to dumb down the science news, it becomes very misleading and open to all that emotional response we've been trained to react with. Politics has become much more "us vs them" and as such is easier for readers/viewers to deal with quickly.

 

I'd prefer less, higher quality coverage than to what is going on now.

Don't you think that newspapers nowadays focus much less on Science articles and more on politics. Shouldn't the public be more educated about recent breakthroughs.

 

 

Newspapers are dying, the internet is the most used and up to date source of News both science and otherwise. The internet has advantages and disadvantages. While the information is easily accessible it is also subject to spin or to be more precise outright lies. Any information you seek should be looked at from several sources and the agenda of those sources has to be taken into account. My rule of thumb is that religious sources have to be cross checked with secular sources and when the source agrees with my own predilections it has to be checked again to make sure I am not being told what i want to believe.