Dead trees

Letter to New Scientist:


Compare and contrast:

"Nobody is arguing—yet —that the tree concept has outlived its usefulness in animals and plants… [I]t is still the best way of explaining how multicellular organisms are related to one another" [Graham Lawton, New Scientist, 24 Jan 2009].

"Darwin was wrong: cutting down the tree of life" [New Scientist cover, 24 Jan 2009].

I appreciate you need to hype up your headlines to sell more dead trees, but I expected better of New Scientist—especially just one week after your own editorial vowed to strive to avoid sexing up headlines in future. Do your marketing people think they've identified a gap in the creationist market or something?

I presume, in future, whenever you show a clade diagram in one of your articles, its caption will come with the disclaimer, "Please Note: This is wrong".

More science, less marketing hype please.

Richard Carter, FCD
The Friends of Charles Darwin
Charlie is our Darwin

Writer and photographer Richard Carter, FCD is the founder of the Friends of Charles Darwin. He lives in Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire.WebsiteFacebookTwitterNewsletterBooks
Buy my book: On the Moor: Science, History and Nature on a Country Walk
“…wonderfully droll, witty and entertaining… At their best Carter’s moorland walks and his meandering intellectual talk are part of a single, deeply coherent enterprise: a restless inquiry into the meaning of place and the nature of self.”
Mark Cocker, author and naturalist
Amazon: UK | .COM | etc.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *