I have to work in SC and I have to say, it's scary sometimes.Just 12 per cent expressed strong confidence in the press to accurately report scientific findings.
-I'm not surprised by this. The press is horrible at reporting science and they do everything they can to make it more "appealing" by giving their articles link-baity titles and over simplifying things that can't be simple. Calling the higgs boson the "GOD PARTICLE" is one example.
It's not just science reporting. It's all reporting. Science is the easiest to point to and say, "Look how bad that is!" It used to be that news was a prestigious job. The people who broke the story, the ones that did the extra leg work. Then it became television's loss leader Now it's not news. It's ratings. Get the most viewers so the ad revenues are higher. It has not been about news for a long time.
Science reporting, as compared to political or general news reporting takes a base of knowledge that is harder to come by and takes time. If took some time, I could be a somewhat decent political reporter IMO but given the same amount of time, I'd be an inadequate science reporter at best.