Inaccuracy in reporting astronomy and science Options

[As old as Voyage...]

I have just watched the BBC's report on the newly created 3D map of dark matter using Hubble data; and it made my heart sink.

I applaud the BBC for giving airtime to such discoveries, but for such a respected organisation their research was awful.

It's no wonder the vast majority of people are either bewildered or disinterested the the universe as a whole when the facts they are given are completely wrong.

It's a shame that tonight 60 million or so people in the UK and many other people around the world were told Hubble shone a beam of light out into the depths of the universe and studied how it was bent by the gravity of dark matter billions of light years away!

And this was a report from the BBCs science correspondant!

I remain downhearted that perhaps the most important story of the week was reported in such a shoddy manner.

Does anyone else feel space is being let down by TV coverage?

[gndonald]

I've picked up the April 2008 edition of APC (Australian Personal Computer) and there is an (advertising) feature article entitled "Computers in Space" (paid for by HP).

Most of it is a fairly accurate descriptions of the constraints facing the use of computers in space (power, gravity, radiation).

It also has a picture of what they claim to be the Shuttle Discovery, it is in fact a picture of the first launch of Columbia. (See: here The article (credited to one David Braue) also has the following when it starts to discuss future uses of computers in space:

Missions such as next years Mars Telecommunication Orbiter...

I thought that NASA had canceled this one two years ago

I wonder where on Earth (or off it) the author did his research.

(Correction made after confirming picture in article is of Columbia)