From Bill T: <<Actually, the original point was the disclaimer, which had zero to do with
shaping words.>> 

Yes, the original point was that the disclaimer appeared to be a red flag that readers should take warning, but that other articles that do not have disclaimers should be given equal or higher consideration. The editor's comment that the "death culture" quote was an extreme view does not carry quite the same weight as a boxed disclaimer stating the article "does not undergo scientific peer review" and that the "editorial staff does not always agree with his views".

Peter Armitage summed up the topic: <<We need an educated beekeeping community and the popular journals/magazines have an important role in this education.>>

The journals should have articles that give proper attribution and have a works cited list, so that readers may follow up and evaluate the source to determine if the argument has sound premises. I would rather see the science debated than edited. 

As readers, we should communicate more with the editors and publishers; addresses are found on the journals' contents page. 

Debbie Hewitt in Maryland 

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html