Consensus reports need not platform credentialed contrarian views

Evidence

Ultimately, the mere existence of contrarians is not a good reason to share their views or give them a platform. And the suggestion that it would be unfair not to report contrarian views—or at least, not to report them specifically as contrarian views—especially when the scientific community has otherwise reached consensus, is wrong, at least if what we care about is successful action. This is so even when the contrarians have excellent credentials and legitimate results that do support their views. When we are trying to solve difficult problems, there will always be high-quality and convincing evidence that pushes us in both directions. — Cailin O’Connor and James Owen Weatherall, The Misinformation Age, 535

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Formal two-sided balance distorts rather than serves truth in reporting conflict — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 866; Structured reports can layer institutional position over scholarly dissent. — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 46

Broader Connections

• Formal two-sided balance distorts rather than serves truth in reporting conflict #qualifies (0.75) — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 866
• Structured reports can layer institutional position over scholarly dissent. #corroborates (0.72) — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 46