Is science news being reported accurately?

A recent TV debate has sparked discussions over whether science news is being reported accurately.

TV presenter and Nature podcast editor Adam Rutherford commented at the debate at the Royal Institution that science reporting was prone to "constant self-flagellation, anxiety and repressed sexuality."

The debate was set up in response to accusations that science reporters fail to check their copy with scientists, fail to read the entirety of the papers that are released and are unable to send their copies to specialist sub-editors. The event was set up by the Guardian's Alok Jha, and the newspaper has followed up on proceedings afterwards.

James Randerson emailed 46 journalists, from national newspapers, newswires, the BBC, ITV and Channel 4, and ex-specialist reporters now freelancing or in PR. From the 24 responses he received back, he found that the vast majority of reporters from all spectrums claimed that they did fully adhere to journalist codes of ethics when reporting on science stories.

Indeed, apart from one tabloid specialist reporter, all participants replied that they 'always' or 'mostly' read the paper when writing/broadcasting their stories.