
*
One thing I realised today was that "greatness" in journalism is easy to come by because most journalists - in whatever capacities - are as close to doing moderate good as they are to doing immense bad. In fact, I correct myself: not greatness but notoriety. However, irrespective of all the appreciation or ignorance of the people toward this aspect, I'm not sure all journalists are aware of it. Even if they are, how is its knowledge changing them?
*
The British parliament recently passed a law that does three important things:
- Offers protection to peer-reviewed publications that contain articles reviewed by one or more experts and that contain backed-up claims disputing existing evidence
- Offers protection to conference proceedings and reports thereof for the same reasons as above
- Shifts the burden of proof from the claimant to the party defending the disputed evidence and requires the latter to prove that it has been "harmed" by the claim
Obviously, this law goes a long way in protecting and, very likely, encouraging debates within and without the scientific community.
Do such laws exist in India, though? Or are debates in the country not big enough yet to warrant such protection?
*

Given that, what could the others have been thinking of? Family, friends, some rest?