[ExI] Bad, New Scientist, Bad!

[ben]

Damien Declaimed:

> <http://www.talkingsquid.net/archives/569>
> 
> <http://www.talkingsquid.net/archives/587>
> 
> <...most people absorb the cultural messages around them. The only 
> message most people will take in is from seeing the front cover of 
> New Scientist as they walk past the newsstand; millions of people 
> will brush past and take on board the message that one of the most 
> respected science magazines has announced that Darwin was wrong. Very 
> few will buy the magazine to read the article, which is the only way 
> they will learn that the story is only about a metaphor that Darwin 
> used and not a critique of the theory of evolution.
> 
> There is no defence for New Scientist on this one.>

If the purpose of New Scientist was to educate, there would be 
absolutely no defence.

Unfortunately, its purpose is to make money, so this strategy of getting 
more people to buy it (including the kind of luddites who wouldn't 
normally do so) is quite clever.  Execrable, i agree, but clever.

How many times have people written in, saying "Why do you have adverts 
for 4x4s next to articles on pollution and sustainability?".

Because it's all about money.

Ben Zaiboc