Comments on: The Salinger dismissal – Is there more to it? http://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2009/04/26/the-salinger-dismissal-is-there-more-to-it/ Our aim is to promote accurate, evidence-based reporting on science and technology by helping the media work more closely with the scientific community. Sun, 09 Oct 2011 23:19:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Roger Jones http://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2009/04/26/the-salinger-dismissal-is-there-more-to-it/comment-page-1/#comment-4852 Roger Jones Tue, 28 Apr 2009 06:25:56 +0000 http://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/?p=2626#comment-4852 I sent a letter to the editor of the New Zealand Herald that explains my position. I think we are in an environment where government corporations micromanage to minimise their risk. This is certainly hapening in Australia. This is folly, because the stifling of scientific communication under bureaucracy limits our ability to manage much more serious risks. Dear Editor, It is with dismay that I read in the Herald (Sat April 25) of Dr Jim Salinger’s sacking by NIWA for “unauthorised” communication with the media. Dr Salinger has done more than any other New Zealand scientist to understand what climate change means for New Zealand and the South Pacific and to raise the public’s understanding on what is happening and how to respond. In these days of corporate management of public communication, we find more research organisations managing their risk by controlling what scientists say and do. These actions ignore greater risks, such as climate change. Dr Salinger has always been a dedicated public servant, communicating his science with dedication and care. NIWA’s actions send the wrong message and have damaged New Zealand’s scientific credibility. In four weeks I am due to give a keynote address at a national conference on adaptation to climate change in Wellington. My message will be that we don’t adapt to climate change by sacking the messenger. I sent a letter to the editor of the New Zealand Herald that explains my position. I think we are in an environment where government corporations micromanage to minimise their risk. This is certainly hapening in Australia. This is folly, because the stifling of scientific communication under bureaucracy limits our ability to manage much more serious risks.

Dear Editor,

It is with dismay that I read in the Herald (Sat April 25) of Dr Jim Salinger’s sacking by NIWA for “unauthorised” communication with the media. Dr Salinger has done more than any other New Zealand scientist to understand what climate change means for New Zealand and the South Pacific and to raise the public’s understanding on what is happening and how to respond. In these days of corporate management of public communication, we find more research organisations managing their risk by controlling what scientists say and do. These actions ignore greater risks, such as climate change. Dr Salinger has always been a dedicated public servant, communicating his science with dedication and care. NIWA’s actions send the wrong message and have damaged New Zealand’s scientific credibility. In four weeks I am due to give a keynote address at a national conference on adaptation to climate change in Wellington. My message will be that we don’t adapt to climate change by sacking the messenger.

]]> By: Sarah http://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2009/04/26/the-salinger-dismissal-is-there-more-to-it/comment-page-1/#comment-4827 Sarah Mon, 27 Apr 2009 09:33:27 +0000 http://www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/?p=2626#comment-4827 Augie Auer will be laughing in his grave! However, this dismisal probably had very little to do with climate change. Augie Auer will be laughing in his grave! However, this dismisal probably had very little to do with climate change.

]]>