Jury rules noted climate scientist was defamed

Paul Voosen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ado6438

IF: 56.9

2024-02-16

Science

Abstract:Verdict punishes bloggers who compared Michael Mann’s work to molestation

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Climatologist Michael Mann wins defamation case: what it means for scientists

Jeff Tollefson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00396-y

IF: 64.8

2024-02-10

Nature

Abstract:Jury awards Mann more than US 1 million — raising hopes for scientists who are politically attacked because of their work.

multidisciplinary sciences
Leading climate scientist Mann wins $1m in defamation lawsuit

Gareth Iacobucci

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q401

2024-02-15

BMJ

Abstract:The climate scientist Michael Mann has been awarded $1m (£0.8m; €0.9m) in a defamation lawsuit against two writers who compared his scientific work to that of a former football coach who was convicted of child molestation.In a statement posted on Mann's X account,1 one of his legal team, Pete Fontaine, said, "Today's verdict vindicates Mike Mann's good name and reputation. It also is a big victory for truth and scientists everywhere who dedicate their lives answering vital scientific questions impacting human health and the planet."The lawsuit, first brought in 2012, centred on articles by Rand Simberg, a former scholar for the Competitive Enterprise Institute think tank, and Mark Steyn, a Canadian writer and presenter who was writing for the National Review at the time. Their criticisms related to Mann's renowned "hockey stick" graph, first published in Nature in 1998, which illustrated the sharp rise in average global temperature in the...

medicine, general & internal
Passion is not misconduct

H Holden Thorp,H. Holden Thorp

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ado6275

IF: 56.9

2024-02-23

Science

Abstract:University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael Mann was awarded more than $1 million in a lawsuit against bloggers who accused him of scientific misconduct in inflammatory terms, likening his treatment of data to what a noted child molester did to children. The verdict suggests that there are limits to which scientists working on politically sensitive topics can be falsely attacked. But the case also says something profound about the difference between matters of opinion and scientific interpretations that can be worked out through normal academic processes. Although Mann has expressed strong—and even intemperate—emotions and words in political discourse, the finding of the District of Columbia Superior Court boiled down to the fact that it is not an opinion that determines when scientific misconduct occurs but rather, misconduct can be established using known processes.

multidisciplinary sciences
'Vindicated': Embattled misinformation researchers celebrate key US Supreme Court decision

Jeff Tollefson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01766-2

IF: 64.8

2024-06-27

Nature

Abstract:The justices rule that the US government can keep talking to scientists and social-media firms with the aim of curbing falsehoods online. The justices rule that the US government can keep talking to scientists and social-media firms with the aim of curbing falsehoods online.

multidisciplinary sciences
New probe finds misconduct by star botanist

Charles Piller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adr0290

IF: 56.9

2024-06-15

Science

Abstract:Steven Newmaster had been cleared, but fresh inquiry concludes he likely made up data

multidisciplinary sciences
Human- Induced Climate Change Arguments Offered By Those Who Dissent

Michael B. McElroy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190490331.003.0009

2016-01-01

Abstract:Chapter 4 presented an extensive account of current understanding of climate change. The evidence that humans are having an important impact on the global climate system is scientifically compelling. And yet there are those who disagree and refuse to accept the evidence. Some of the dissent is based on a visceral feeling that the world is too big for humans to have the capacity to change it. Some is grounded, I believe, on ideology, on an instinctive distrust of science combined with a suspicion of govern¬ment, amplified by a feeling that those in authority are trying to use the issue to advance some other agenda, to increase taxes, for example. More insidious are dissenting views expressed by scientists on the opinion pages of influential newspapers such as The Wall Street Journal (WSJ). If scientists disagree, the implication for the public is that there is no urgency: we can afford to wait until the dust settles before deciding to take action— or not, as the case may be. Missing in the discourse triggered by these communications is the fact that, with few exceptions, the authors of these articles are not well informed on climate science. To put it bluntly, their views reflect personal opinion and in some cases explicit prejudice rather than objective analysis. Their communications are influential, nonetheless, and demand a response. I begin by addressing some of the general sentiments expressed by those who are either on the fence as to the significance of human- induced climate change or who may already have made up their minds that the issue is part of an elaborate hoax to mislead the public. There are a number of recurrent themes: The data purporting to show that the world is warming have been manipu-lated by climate scientists to enhance their funding or for other self- serving reasons.Climate science is complicated; scientists cannot predict the weather. Why should we believe that they could tell us what is going to happen a decade or more in the future? The planet has been warmer in the past; we survived and maybe even prospered.
Scientists under arrest: the researchers taking action over climate change

Daniel Grossman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00480-3

IF: 64.8

2024-02-22

Nature

Abstract:Fed up with a lack of political progress in solving the climate problem, some researchers are becoming activists to slow global warming. Fed up with a lack of political progress in solving the climate problem, some researchers are becoming activists to slow global warming.

multidisciplinary sciences
It's final: the Anthropocene is not an epoch, despite protest over vote

Alexandra Witze

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00868-1

IF: 64.8

2024-03-21

Nature

Abstract:Governing body upholds earlier decision by geoscientists amid drama. Governing body upholds earlier decision by geoscientists amid drama.

multidisciplinary sciences
Guns for hire? The independence of forensic scientists and why it matters

Justice Stephen Hall

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00450618.2024.2422700

2024-11-16

Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences

Abstract:I would like to acknowledge the assistance of my associate, Melanie Owens, in undertaking research for this address. No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s). 1. Wood v The Queen [2012] NSWCCA 21; (2012) 84 NSWLR 581, 621 [736]. 2. R v Wood [2008] NSWSC 1273. 3. Cross R, Evidence for Murder: How Physics Convicted a Killer New South Publishing; 2009. 4. Wood v The Queen 617 [716]. 5. Wood v The Queen 617 [717]. 6. Wood v The Queen 620 [731]. 7. Wood v The Queen 620 [731]. 8. Wood v The Queen 620 [731]. 9. Wood v The Queen 625 [758]. 10. R v Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 1020 [96]. 11. R v Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 1020 [99]. 12. R v Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 1020 [99]. 13. See R v Clark [2000] EWCA Crim 54. 14. See Criminal Appeals Act 1995 (UK) s 9(1). 15. R v Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 1020 [6]. 16. R v Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 1020 [100] - [101]. 17. R v Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 1020 [102]. 18. R v Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 1020 [175]. 19. R v Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 1020 [108]. 20. R v Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 1020 [177] - [178]. 21. 'Royal Statistical Society concerned by issues raised in Sally Clark case', Royal Statistical Society (News Release, 23 October 2001). 22. Peter Green, 'Letter from the President to the Lord Chancellor regarding the use of statistical evidence in court cases', Royal Statistical Society (23 January 2022). 23. Meadow v General Medical Council [2006] EWCH 146 (Admin) [5], [49], [52], [56]; Clare Dyer, 'Professor Roy Meadow struck off', (2005) 331 BMJ 177, 177. 24. Dyer 177. 25. 'Meadow ruling "risk to witnesses"', BBC News (16 July 2005). 26. Meadow v General Medical Council [2006] EWCH 146 (Admin), upheld on appeal in Meadow v General Medical Council [2006] EWCA Civ 1390. 27. Sara Gaines & David Pallister, 'Sally Clark's death accidental, coroner rules', The Guardian (7 November 2007). 28. Clare Dyer, 'Mother convicted of killing her children is freed on appeal', (2005) 330 BMJ 861, 861. 29. National Justice Compania Naviera SA v Prudential Assurance Co Ltd (The Ikarian Reefer) [1993] 2 Lloyd's Rep 68 [81] [82]. 30. Supreme Court of Western Australia Consolidated Practice Directions, 'Expert Evidence', 4.5.2. 31. Whitehouse v Jordan [1980] 1 All ER 650. 32. Whitehouse v Jordan [1980] 1 All ER 650, 655. 33. Whitehouse v Jordan [1981] 1 WLR 246, 256. 34. Phosphate Cooperative Co of Australia Pty Ltd v Shears [1989] VR 665. 35. Phosphate Cooperative Co of Australia Pty Ltd v Shears [1989] VR 665, 683. 36. Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd and Others v Sharman License Holdings Ltd and Others [2005] FCA 1242; 222 FCR 465. 37. Universal Music Australia v Sharman License Holdings 518 [231]. 38. Bank Of Ireland v Watts Group Plc [2017] EWHC 1667 (TCC) [70] (Coulson J). 39. Harrington-Smith v Western Australia (No 7) (2003) FCA 893; (2003) 130 FCR 424. 40. Harrington-Smith v WA 427 [19], 429 [27]. 41. Federal Court of Australia, Expert Evidence Practice Note (GPN-EXPT) , [3.1]. 42. Layla Ferris, 'No, the government is not controlling the weather. "It's so stupid, it's got to stop", Biden says'. CBS News (2024 October 9). 43. Oliver Milman, '"It's mindblowing": US meteorologists face death threats as hurricane conspiracies surge'. The Guardian (2024 October 11).

medicine, legal
Climate Law: Path Paved for Civil Action

Yali Si,Herbert H. T. Prins

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/523410e

IF: 64.8

2015-01-01

Nature

Abstract:The Lancet Commission on Health and Climate Change last month concluded that climate change is a risk to public health (N. Watts et al. Lancet http://doi.org/56b; 2015). In the same week, a Dutch court ordered the government of the Netherlands to improve its reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions to protect the population from harm and to keep the country habitable by safeguarding the environment (see Nature http://doi.org/559; 2015). We suggest that this court order is closely studied by other countries. If governments do not act, they should expect lawsuits from families who lost relatives during, say, the heatwaves in Europe in 2003 or in Pakistan and India this year.
Politicized Science Communication: Predicting Scientists’ Acceptance of Overstatements by Their Knowledge Certainty, Media Perceptions, and Presumed Media Effects

Senja Post,Natalia Ramirez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018769668

2018-04-25

Abstract:Partisans in mediated conflicts usually perceive hostile news media, anticipate undesired media effects, and intend to engage discursively. It is hypothesized that hostile media perceptions also encourage polarizing communication. This is tested for scientists involved in a politicized science dispute. German climate scientists ( n = 131) firmly believe in anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Yet not all dismiss alternative hypotheses altogether. Results indicate that the more certain climate scientists are of AGW, the more they perceive that the news media downplay AGW and presume that the media nourish politicians’ doubts about it. This explains their justifications of overstatements of scientific findings in public.

communication
The impact of misinformation presented during jury deliberation on juror memory and decision-making

Hayley J. Cullen,Natali Dilevski,Faye T. Nitschke,Gianni Ribeiro,Shobanah Brind,Nikita Woolley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1232228

IF: 3.8

2024-01-27

Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract:When deliberating, jurors may introduce misinformation that may influence other jurors' memory and decision-making. In two studies, we explored the impact of misinformation exposure during jury deliberation. Participants in both studies read a transcript of an alleged sexual assault. In Study 1 ( N = 275), participants encountered either consistent pro-prosecution misinformation, consistent pro-defense misinformation, or contradictory misinformation (pro-prosecution and pro-defense). In Study 2 ( N = 339), prior to encountering either pro-prosecution or pro-defense misinformation while reading a jury deliberation transcript, participants either received or did not receive a judicial instruction about misinformation exposure during deliberation. Participants in both studies completed legal decision-making variables (e.g., defendant guilt rating) before and after deliberation, and their memory was assessed for misinformation acceptance via recall and source memory tasks. In Study 1, misinformation type did not influence legal decision-making, but pro-prosecution misinformation was more likely to be misattributed as trial evidence than pro-defense or contradictory misinformation. In Study 2, pro-defense misinformation was more likely to be misattributed to the trial than pro-prosecution misinformation, and rape myths moderated this. Furthermore, exposure to pro-defense misinformation skewed legal decision-making towards the defense's case. However, the judicial instruction about misinformation exposure did not influence memory or decision-making. Together, these findings suggest that misinformation in jury deliberations may distort memory for trial evidence and bias decision-making, highlighting the need to develop effective safeguards for reducing the impact of misinformation in trial contexts.

psychology, multidisciplinary
'Mind-forg'd Manacles': Virtual Experience and Innocent Publication

Francine Rochford

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11196-023-09971-4

2023-02-21

Abstract:In Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd v Voller ('Voller') the Australian High Court held that media companies maintaining Facebook comment pages could be liable for the defamatory posts of commenters on those sites. The decision focussed entirely on whether, by maintaining the Facebook page, the companies had 'published' the statements of commenters. Hearings on other aspects of the tort litigation continue. This paper considers the implications of the tort of defamation on public participation on political will formation where, as is increasingly the case, the participation occurs virtually. Australian law has already tackled the law of defamation as a threat to freedom of political communication; Voller continues the jurisprudence by considering whether hosting an online forum for debate amounts to publication. The more recent High Court judgment in Google LLC v Defteros demonstrated the necessity of the law to align the 'acts' necessary to found legal action with the new environment of automated search engines. The troubled intersection of dematerialised practices of political and cultural discourse and jurisdictionally bound laws of defamation challenges participatory governance as tribes form and dissolve and shift between geographical interests. Defamation in Australia is a tort of strict liability; and, absenting applicable defences, any participation in communication is sufficient to make that participant a publisher and a party to the defamation. The online environment stretches words across geographical and jurisdictional boundaries, but it also stretches and contorts concepts of fault and responsibility. Participatory digital cultural practices integrating users in the creation of cultural heritage simultaneously draw participants into transgressions, both cultural and legal, which are amplified by the medium. Questions of collective guilt, 'shades' of moral responsibility and disproportionality between blameworthiness and legal liability challenge laws formulated for the printing press but now deployed in the online environment. In this way the digitized participatory environment presents deep challenges to law and legal systems, which are chained to geography. This paper considers the concept of innocent publication in the context of the digitized participatory environment and the way in which the virtual experience is dissolving concepts of geographically defined jurisdictions.
‘I’m a powder keg’: ousted eLife editor on being fired in wake of Israel–Hamas remarks

Nicola Jones

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-03330-w

IF: 64.8

2023-10-25

Nature

Abstract:Debate rages in scientific community over Michael Eisen’s removal from prominent open-access journal.

multidisciplinary sciences
Dana-Farber retractions: meet the blogger who spotted problems in dozens of cancer papers

Max Kozlov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00202-9

IF: 64.8

2024-01-26

Nature

Abstract:Nature talks to Sholto David about his process for flagging image manipulation and his tips for scientists under scrutiny. Nature talks to Sholto David about his process for flagging image manipulation and his tips for scientists under scrutiny.

multidisciplinary sciences
Biologist returns after harassment suspension

Meredith Wadman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adr6186

IF: 56.9

2024-07-13

Science

Abstract:Bruce Blumberg's graduate student reported fleeing harrowing conference trip in Spain

multidisciplinary sciences
Laughably Disingenuous, Brazenly Bogus, Extreme Green “Lawfare”: The Rhetorical Framing of Environmentalist Actors in Coal Age Magazine

Katie Cruger,Lou Martin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5406/jappastud.25.2.0165

2019-10-01

Journal of Appalachian Studies

Abstract:Abstract In this project, we’ve combined methods and resources from history, communication, and rhetorical criticism in order to unpack the subtle and not-so-subtle ways in which the coal industry chips away at the credibility of reformers. The coal industry has played a central role in shaping the economic, political, and social systems of Appalachia as well as public discourse and shared values in the region. This study analyzes the framing of the terms “environmentalist” and “activist” in Coal Age magazine, a widely read industry publication, from 2011 through 2016. Industry actors are commonly depicted as good neighbors, rational conservationists, and (almost always) men of action, while “environmentalists” are their meddling, litigious, irrational, often malicious, self-serving foils. Print propaganda like this has had real-world consequences for those who oppose the industry’s environmentally destructive practices.
Science and Environmental Communication on YouTube: Strategically Distorted Communications in Online Videos on Climate Change and Climate Engineering

Joachim Allgaier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2019.00036

2019-07-25

Frontiers in Communication

Abstract:The online video-sharing website YouTube is extremely popular globally, also as a tool for information on science and environmental topics. However, only little is known about what kind of information users find when they are searching for information about climate science, climate change, and climate engineering on YouTube. This contribution presents results from an exploratory research project that investigates whether videos found on YouTube adhere to or challenge scientific consensus views. Ten search terms were employed to search for and analyze 200 videos about climate and climate modification topics, which are contested topics in online media. The online anonymization tool Tor has been used for the randomization of the sample and to avoid personalization of the results. A heuristic qualitative classification tool was set up to categorize the videos in the sample. Eighty-nine videos of the 200 videos in the sample are supporting scientific consensus views about anthropogenic climate change, and climate scientists are discussing climate topics with deniers of climate change in four videos in the sample. Unexpectedly, the majority of the videos in the sample (107 videos) supports worldviews that are opposing scientific consensus views: 16 videos deny anthropogenic climate change and 91 videos in the sample propagate straightforward conspiracy theories about climate engineering and climate change. Videos supporting the scientific mainstream view received only slightly more views (16,941,949 views in total) than those opposing the mainstream scientific position (16,939,655 views in total). Consequences for the public communication of climate change and climate engineering are discussed in the second part of the article. The research presented in this contribution is particularly interested in finding out more about strategically distorted communications about climate change and climate engineering in online environments and in critically analyzing them.
Divisive Sun-dimming study at Harvard cancelled: what's next?

Jeff Tollefson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00876-1

IF: 64.8

2024-03-29

Nature

Abstract:As the climate crisis rages on, advocacy for testing controversial solar geoengineering technology is ramping up. As the climate crisis rages on, advocacy for testing controversial solar geoengineering technology is ramping up.

multidisciplinary sciences
Media framing of trolling and online abuse: silencing strategies, symbolic violence, and victim blaming

Karen Lumsden,Heather Morgan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2017.1316755

IF: 1.953

2017-04-27

Feminist Media Studies

Abstract:This article draws on British newspaper reports in order to demonstrate that trolling, and the media’s subsequent framing of trolling, involves “silencing strategies.” It is important to examine how trolling is discussed within the media to understand how it might frame public opinion, debate, and action, and implicitly victim blame. The article presents findings on the forms of (online) abuse and behaviours related to trolling in media reports, including rape threats, death threats, and body shaming. It also explores the media portrayal of victims of trolling, and the advice given concerning how to respond to trolls. To comply with the message to women, which is propagated in media and popular discourses: “do not feed the troll” means that “symbolic violence” is exercised with the complicity of the victim(s) of trolling, which has broader implications.

communication,womens studies

Jury rules noted climate scientist was defamed

Climatologist Michael Mann wins defamation case: what it means for scientists

Leading climate scientist Mann wins $1m in defamation lawsuit

Passion is not misconduct

'Vindicated': Embattled misinformation researchers celebrate key US Supreme Court decision

New probe finds misconduct by star botanist

Human- Induced Climate Change Arguments Offered By Those Who Dissent

Scientists under arrest: the researchers taking action over climate change

It's final: the Anthropocene is not an epoch, despite protest over vote

Guns for hire? The independence of forensic scientists and why it matters

Climate Law: Path Paved for Civil Action

Politicized Science Communication: Predicting Scientists’ Acceptance of Overstatements by Their Knowledge Certainty, Media Perceptions, and Presumed Media Effects

The impact of misinformation presented during jury deliberation on juror memory and decision-making

'Mind-forg'd Manacles': Virtual Experience and Innocent Publication

‘I’m a powder keg’: ousted eLife editor on being fired in wake of Israel–Hamas remarks

Dana-Farber retractions: meet the blogger who spotted problems in dozens of cancer papers

Biologist returns after harassment suspension

Laughably Disingenuous, Brazenly Bogus, Extreme Green “Lawfare”: The Rhetorical Framing of Environmentalist Actors in Coal Age Magazine

Science and Environmental Communication on YouTube: Strategically Distorted Communications in Online Videos on Climate Change and Climate Engineering

Divisive Sun-dimming study at Harvard cancelled: what's next?

Media framing of trolling and online abuse: silencing strategies, symbolic violence, and victim blaming